Chrysler Sebring 2003 vs Mercedes CLK 2005
| Gearbox: | Manual | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 1.8 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing chain | |
| Timing belt usually needs to be replaced more often than the chain, but it is usually significantly cheaper. Timing belt motors are generally quieter and less vibrating than chain motors. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 141 HP | 163 HP | |
| Torque: | 188 NM | 240 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12.3 seconds | 10.5 seconds | |
|
Mercedes CLK is a more dynamic driving. Chrysler Sebring engine produces 22 HP less power than Mercedes CLK, whereas torque is 52 NM less than Mercedes CLK. Due to the lower power, Chrysler Sebring reaches 100 km/h speed 1.8 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 9.1 | 8.7 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 9.5 l/100km | 8.8 l/100km | |
|
The Mercedes CLK is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Chrysler Sebring consumes 0.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mercedes CLK, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Chrysler Sebring could require 60 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Chrysler Sebring consumes 0.7 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mercedes CLK. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 62 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 650 km in combined cycle | 710 km in combined cycle | |
| 630 km with real consumption | 700 km with real consumption | ||
| Mercedes CLK gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | |
| Front-wheel drive cars (Chrysler Sebring) have better traction on slippery roads and when climbing hills, better fuel economy, and are less expensive to purchase. On the disadvantage side, FWD cars usually have less towing capacity, poorer acceleration and harder handling. Rear-wheel drive cars (Mercedes CLK) have better handling on dry roads, better acceleration, more even weight distribution and more fun to drive. RWD is also better for towing large loads. The cons of rear-wheel drive are less interior and trunk space and more difficulty maneuvering in wet and snowy conditions. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 370'000 km | 440'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used, but under equal conditions the average life of a Mercedes CLK engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 11 years | 13 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Chrysler PT Cruiser, Mitsubishi Eclipse | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Mercedes C klase, Mercedes E klase, Mercedes SLK | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Mercedes CLK might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.92 m | 4.65 m | |
| Width: | 1.76 m | 1.74 m | |
| Height: | 1.40 m | 1.42 m | |
|
Chrysler Sebring is larger, but slightly lower. Chrysler Sebring is 27 cm longer than the Mercedes CLK, 2 cm wider, while the height of Chrysler Sebring is 2 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 320 litres | 276 litres | |
|
Chrysler Sebring has more luggage capacity. Chrysler Sebring has 44 litres more trunk space than the Mercedes CLK. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11 meters | 10.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Chrysler Sebring is 0.2 metres more than that of the Mercedes CLK. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`990 | no data | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | average | |
| Average price (€): | 3400 | 7200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Chrysler Sebring has
|
Mercedes CLK has
| |