Chrysler Sebring 2003 vs Mercedes SLK 2004
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 | 8.3 seconds | |
Mercedes SLK is a more dynamic driving. Chrysler Sebring engine produces 22 HP less power than Mercedes SLK, whereas torque is 52 NM less than Mercedes SLK. Due to the lower power, Chrysler Sebring reaches 100 km/h speed 4 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 9.1 | 8.8 | |
Real fuel consumption: | 9.5 l/100km | 9.1 l/100km | |
By specification Chrysler Sebring consumes 0.3 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mercedes SLK, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Chrysler Sebring could require 45 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Chrysler Sebring consumes 0.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mercedes SLK. | |||
Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 70 litres | |
Full fuel tank distance: | 650 km in combined cycle | 790 km in combined cycle | |
880 km on highway | 1040 km on highway | ||
630 km with real consumption | 760 km with real consumption | ||
Mercedes SLK 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 SLK) 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 SLK 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 CLK | |
In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Mercedes SLK might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Mercedes SLK 2004 1.8 engine: The most notable issue with this engine is the sticking of exhaust valves due to carbon buildup. Another significant problem is the unreliable timing chain, which can stretch by 100,000 km. Early symptoms of a ... More about Mercedes SLK 2004 1.8 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
Length: | 4.92 m | 4.09 m | |
Width: | 1.76 m | 1.79 m | |
Height: | 1.40 m | 1.30 m | |
Chrysler Sebring is 83 cm longer than the Mercedes SLK, 3 cm narrower, while the height of Chrysler Sebring is 10 cm higher. | |||
Trunk capacity: | 320 litres | 208 litres | |
Chrysler Sebring has more luggage capacity. Chrysler Sebring has 112 litres more trunk space than the Mercedes SLK. | |||
Turning diameter: | 11 meters | 10.5 meters | |
The turning circle of the Chrysler Sebring is 0.5 metres more than that of the Mercedes SLK, which means Chrysler Sebring can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
Gross weight (kg): | 1`990 | 1`705 | |
Safety: | no data | no data | |
Quality: | no data | high | |
Average price (€): | 3200 | 7200 | |
Pros and Cons: |
Chrysler Sebring has
|
Mercedes SLK has
| |