Honda Prelude 1996 vs Mercedes CLK 1997
| Gearbox: | Manual | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 2.3 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: | 133 HP | 193 HP | |
| Torque: | 179 NM | 280 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.2 seconds | 8.4 seconds | |
|
Mercedes CLK is a more dynamic driving. Honda Prelude engine produces 60 HP less power than Mercedes CLK, whereas torque is 101 NM less than Mercedes CLK. Due to the lower power, Honda Prelude reaches 100 km/h speed 0.8 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 9.2 | 9.9 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 9.0 l/100km | 10.5 l/100km | |
|
The Honda Prelude is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Honda Prelude consumes 0.7 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mercedes CLK, which means that by driving the Honda Prelude over 15,000 km in a year you can save 105 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Honda Prelude consumes 1.5 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mercedes CLK. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 62 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 650 km in combined cycle | 620 km in combined cycle | |
| 820 km on highway | 830 km on highway | ||
| 660 km with real consumption | 590 km with real consumption | ||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | |
| Front-wheel drive cars (Honda Prelude) 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 CLK) 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: | 420'000 km | 520'000 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 CLK engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 13 years | 8 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | Used also on Mercedes SLK | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The Mercedes CLK 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: | 4.54 m | 4.57 m | |
| Width: | 1.75 m | 1.72 m | |
| Height: | 1.32 m | 1.37 m | |
| Honda Prelude is 3 cm shorter than the Mercedes CLK, 3 cm wider, while the height of Honda Prelude is 5 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | 420 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 11 meters | 10.7 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Honda Prelude is 0.3 metres more than that of the Mercedes CLK. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`200 | 1`850 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 1200 | 1400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Honda Prelude has
|
Mercedes CLK has
| |