Chevrolet Camaro 1998 vs Mercedes CLK 2000
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 3.8 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 193 HP | 163 HP | |
| Torque: | 305 NM | 230 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 8.5 seconds | 9.9 seconds | |
|
Chevrolet Camaro is more dynamic to drive. Chevrolet Camaro engine produces 30 HP more power than Mercedes CLK, whereas torque is 75 NM more than Mercedes CLK. Thanks to more power Chevrolet Camaro reaches 100 km/h speed 1.4 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 12.4 | 9.5 | |
|
The Mercedes CLK is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Chevrolet Camaro consumes 2.9 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mercedes CLK, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Chevrolet Camaro could require 435 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 59 litres | 62 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 470 km in combined cycle | 650 km in combined cycle | |
| 610 km on highway | 860 km on highway | ||
| Mercedes CLK gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
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`020 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | average | |
| Average price (€): | 3000 | 4200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Chevrolet Camaro has
|
Mercedes CLK has
| |