Mercedes C class 2004 vs Mitsubishi Lancer 2008
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.8 Petrol | 1.8 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 143 HP | 143 HP | |
| Torque: | 220 NM | 178 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.9 seconds | 9.8 seconds | |
| Mercedes C class and Mitsubishi Lancer have the same engine power, but Mercedes C class torque is 42 NM more than Mitsubishi Lancer. Mercedes C class reaches 100 km/h speed 0.1 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.4 | 7.7 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 9.0 l/100km | 8.3 l/100km | |
|
The Mitsubishi Lancer is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mercedes C class consumes 0.7 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi Lancer, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mercedes C class could require 105 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mercedes C class consumes 0.7 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi Lancer. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 62 litres | 59 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 730 km in combined cycle | 760 km in combined cycle | |
| 980 km on highway | 960 km on highway | ||
| 680 km with real consumption | 710 km with real consumption | ||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
| Front-wheel drive cars (Mitsubishi Lancer) 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 | |||
| Engine production duration: | 13 years | 10 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Mercedes E klase, Mercedes CLK, Mercedes SLK | Used also on Mitsubishi ASX | |
| 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: | yes | no | |
| 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. | |||
| Mercedes C klase 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 C klase 2004 1.8 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.53 m | 4.57 m | |
| Width: | 1.73 m | 1.76 m | |
| Height: | 1.43 m | 1.49 m | |
|
Mercedes C class is smaller. Mercedes C class is 4 cm shorter than the Mitsubishi Lancer, 3 cm narrower, while the height of Mercedes C class is 6 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | 400 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.8 meters | 10 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mercedes C class is 0.8 metres more than that of the Mitsubishi Lancer, which means Mercedes C class can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`500 | 1`850 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | average | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 2800 | 3000 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 7.4/10 | 8.8/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mercedes C klase has
|
Mitsubishi Lancer has
| |