Mercedes CLK 1997 vs Toyota Celica 1994
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.3 Petrol | 1.8 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing belt | |
| Engine chain usually needs to be replaced less often than the timing belt, but the cost of replacing the chain is usually higher. Chain motors are considered to be more reliable, but noisier and more vibration generating. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 193 HP | 116 HP | |
| Torque: | 280 NM | 154 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 8.4 seconds | 10.2 seconds | |
|
Mercedes CLK is more dynamic to drive. Mercedes CLK engine produces 77 HP more power than Toyota Celica, whereas torque is 126 NM more than Toyota Celica. Thanks to more power Mercedes CLK reaches 100 km/h speed 1.8 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 9.9 | 7.9 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 10.5 l/100km | 8.2 l/100km | |
|
The Toyota Celica is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mercedes CLK consumes 2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Toyota Celica, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mercedes CLK could require 300 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mercedes CLK consumes 2.3 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Toyota Celica. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 62 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 620 km in combined cycle | 750 km in combined cycle | |
| 830 km on highway | 930 km on highway | ||
| 590 km with real consumption | 730 km with real consumption | ||
| Toyota Celica gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
| Front-wheel drive cars (Toyota Celica) 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 | |||
| Engine production duration: | 8 years | 9 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Mercedes SLK | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Toyota Avensis, Toyota Corolla, Toyota Carina E | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Toyota Celica might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The Mercedes CLK engine has hydraulic tappets (lifters), providing quieter operation and no need for periodic adjustment, but they are more complex in design and can cause serious engine damage in case of failure. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.57 m | 4.42 m | |
| Width: | 1.72 m | 1.75 m | |
| Height: | 1.37 m | 1.30 m | |
| Mercedes CLK is 15 cm longer than the Toyota Celica, 3 cm narrower, while the height of Mercedes CLK is 7 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 420 litres | 283 litres | |
|
Mercedes CLK has more luggage capacity. Mercedes CLK has 137 litres more trunk space than the Toyota Celica. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.7 meters | 10.4 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mercedes CLK is 0.3 metres more than that of the Toyota Celica. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`850 | 1`510 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 1400 | 2000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mercedes CLK has
|
Toyota Celica has
| |