Mercedes CLS 2004 vs Toyota Celica 2002
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 3.5 Petrol | 1.8 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Double-row timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 272 HP | 192 HP | |
| Torque: | 350 NM | 180 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 7 seconds | 7.4 seconds | |
|
Mercedes CLS is more dynamic to drive. Mercedes CLS engine produces 80 HP more power than Toyota Celica, whereas torque is 170 NM more than Toyota Celica. Thanks to more power Mercedes CLS reaches 100 km/h speed 0.4 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 10.0 | 8.4 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 10.7 l/100km | 8.6 l/100km | |
|
The Toyota Celica is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mercedes CLS consumes 1.6 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Toyota Celica, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mercedes CLS could require 240 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mercedes CLS consumes 2.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Toyota Celica. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 80 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 800 km in combined cycle | 650 km in combined cycle | |
| 1020 km on highway | 830 km on highway | ||
| 740 km with real consumption | 630 km with real consumption | ||
| Mercedes CLS 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 CLS) 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: | 450'000 km | 280'000 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 CLS engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 13 years | 12 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 9 other car models, including Mercedes C klase, Mercedes E klase, Mercedes ML, Mercedes S klase | Used also on Toyota Corolla | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Mercedes CLS might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The Mercedes CLS 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: | 4.91 m | 4.35 m | |
| Width: | 1.85 m | 1.74 m | |
| Height: | 1.40 m | 1.32 m | |
|
Mercedes CLS is larger. Mercedes CLS is 56 cm longer than the Toyota Celica, 11 cm wider, while the height of Mercedes CLS is 8 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 505 litres | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 11.2 meters | 10.4 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mercedes CLS is 0.8 metres more than that of the Toyota Celica, which means Mercedes CLS can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`195 | 1`200 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | below average | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 6200 | 2400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mercedes CLS has
|
Toyota Celica has
| |