Chevrolet Camaro 1998 vs Mercedes CLK 1999
Select specific versions of each model (by engine capacity, power, drivetrain and gearbox) for an accurate comparison
| Gearbox: | Manual/Automatic | Manual/Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engines: | 3.8 | 2.0 - 5.4 | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 193 HP | 136 - 347 HP | |
| Torque: | 305 NM | 190 - 510 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 8.5 - 8.8 seconds | 6.2 - 12.8 seconds | |
| Select a car version for a more accurate comparison! | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 11.7 - 12.4 | 9.4 - 12.2 | |
|
Chevrolet Camaro petrol engines consumes on average 1.8 litres more fuel per 100 km than Mercedes CLK. This comparison does not take engine capacity into account, so to compare the fuel consumption of specific engines, select the car version! | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.91 m | 4.57 m | |
| Width: | 1.88 m | 1.72 m | |
| Height: | 1.30 m | 1.38 m | |
|
Chevrolet Camaro is larger, but lower. Chevrolet Camaro is 34 cm longer than the Mercedes CLK, 16 cm wider, while the height of Chevrolet Camaro is 8 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 11.6 meters | 10.7 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Chevrolet Camaro is 0.9 metres more than that of the Mercedes CLK, which means Chevrolet Camaro can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | no data | ~ 2`031 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | average | |
| Average price (€): | 3000 | 4400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Chevrolet Camaro has
|
Mercedes CLK has
| |