Ford Mustang 2005 vs Mercedes CLK 2002
| Gearbox: | Manual | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 4.6 Petrol | 2.7 Diesel | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 304 HP | 170 HP | |
| Torque: | 427 NM | 400 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | n/a seconds | 9.4 seconds | |
| Ford Mustang engine produces 134 HP more power than Mercedes CLK, whereas torque is 27 NM more than Mercedes CLK. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 13.0 | 6.9 | |
|
The Mercedes CLK is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Ford Mustang consumes 6.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mercedes CLK, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Ford Mustang could require 915 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 61 litres | 62 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 460 km in combined cycle | 890 km in combined cycle | |
| 670 km on highway | 1160 km on highway | ||
| Mercedes CLK gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.77 m | 4.64 m | |
| Width: | 1.88 m | 1.74 m | |
| Height: | 1.39 m | 1.41 m | |
|
Ford Mustang is larger, but slightly lower. Ford Mustang is 13 cm longer than the Mercedes CLK, 14 cm wider, while the height of Ford Mustang is 3 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 350 litres | 435 litres | |
|
Mercedes CLK has more luggage space. Despite its longer length, Ford Mustang has 85 litres less trunk space than the Mercedes CLK. This could mean that the Ford Mustang uses more space in the cabin, so the driver and passengers could be more spacious and comfortable. | |||
| Turning diameter: | no data | 10.8 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | no data | 2`100 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | average | |
| Average price (€): | 10 800 | 3000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Ford Mustang has
|
Mercedes CLK has
| |