Mercedes-Benz CLK

Our verdict

Competent but a bit too mature to cut it as a sports car. Unless you’re talking about the CLK 63…

Comfort

Nicely-sorted Merc sweetness on the ride front, and with rear seats you might actually be able to get passengers in. Not very big passengers, mind. The coupe roofline robs some vision in the rear view, too.

Performance

Forget the wheezy entry-level 1.8-litre cars – even if they are ‘supercharged’. If you can’t justify the weapons-gade 474bhp 63 AMG V8, how about the CLK320 CDI? It’s 244bhp and 6.9 seconds to 62mph of V6 loveliness, without the commitment wallet-hole of the CLK500 and above. Slick five-speed auto makes for relaxed but very quick progress.

Cool

Non-AMG versions scream ‘competency’. And competency isn’t cool.

Quality

Merc went through a dodgy quality period a few years ago, but the CLK once again feels as it should – even though Mercedes’ predilection for shades of grey, beige and black might confuse you. The materials are all of good quality, and the fit and finish throughout is more than up to scratch.

Handling

On the softer side. This isn’t a Lotus Elise, and is generally more suited to the posh-pose image. For a folding hard-top, doesn’t feel too heavy – and won’t scuttle you to death either.

Practicality

There’s a big old boot at 435 litres which will swallow several golf bags – a real bonus for one of the few genuinely four-seater convertibles around. Pop-up roll hoops mean that rear visibility isn’t destroyed with the roof down. Unless you’re planning on flipping it, that is.

Running costs

As above, the diesels are your best bet here. If the 320 CDI is still a bit pricey for you, the 270 CDI is a good bet – over 40mpg and you’ll only get hit with 20 per cent tax. But we still want a CLK500 convertible. Or a Black Series…