Honda Accord 1998 vs Mercedes C class 2000
| Gearbox: | Manual | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.8 Petrol | 2.1 Diesel | |
| 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: | 136 HP | 143 HP | |
| Torque: | 175 NM | 315 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.4 seconds | 10.5 seconds | |
| Honda Accord engine produces 7 HP less power than Mercedes C class, whereas torque is 140 NM less than Mercedes C class. Despite less power, Honda Accord reaches 100 km/h speed 0.1 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.4 | 6.7 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.9 l/100km | 7.2 l/100km | |
|
The Mercedes C class is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Honda Accord consumes 1.7 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mercedes C class, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Honda Accord could require 255 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Honda Accord consumes 1.7 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mercedes C class. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 65 litres | 62 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 770 km in combined cycle | 920 km in combined cycle | |
| 940 km on highway | 1210 km on highway | ||
| 730 km with real consumption | 860 km with real consumption | ||
| Mercedes C class gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | |
| Front-wheel drive cars (Honda Accord) 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 C class) 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: | 440'000 km | 560'000 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 C class engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 9 years | 9 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | Used also on Mercedes E klase | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Mercedes C class might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The Mercedes C class 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: | 4.60 m | 4.53 m | |
| Width: | 1.75 m | 1.73 m | |
| Height: | 1.43 m | 1.43 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Honda Accord is 7 cm longer than the Mercedes C class, 2 cm wider the height of the cars does not differ significantly. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 430 litres | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.7 meters | 10.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Honda Accord is 0.1 metres less than that of the Mercedes C class. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`890 | 1`500 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | above average | average | |
| Honda Accord has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Mercedes C class has serious deffects in 10 percent more cases than Honda Accord, so Honda Accord quality is probably slightly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 1000 | 1600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Honda Accord has
|
Mercedes C klase has
| |