Mercedes CLK 2002 vs Chrysler Sebring 2000
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.6 Petrol | 3.0 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 170 HP | 203 HP | |
| Torque: | 240 NM | 278 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.5 seconds | 10 seconds | |
| Mercedes CLK engine produces 33 HP less power than Chrysler Sebring, whereas torque is 38 NM less than Chrysler Sebring. Despite less power, Mercedes CLK reaches 100 km/h speed 0.5 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 10.4 | 10.1 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 10.6 l/100km | 10.0 l/100km | |
|
The Chrysler Sebring is a better choice in terms of fuel economy based on user-reported consumption, although the specification shows otherwise. By specification Mercedes CLK consumes 0.3 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Chrysler Sebring, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mercedes CLK could require 45 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mercedes CLK consumes 0.6 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Chrysler Sebring. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 62 litres | 62 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 590 km in combined cycle | 610 km in combined cycle | |
| 820 km on highway | 730 km on highway | ||
| 580 km with real consumption | 620 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 (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 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. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.64 m | 4.83 m | |
| Width: | 1.74 m | 1.79 m | |
| Height: | 1.41 m | 1.37 m | |
|
Mercedes CLK is smaller, but higher. Mercedes CLK is 19 cm shorter than the Chrysler Sebring, 5 cm narrower, while the height of Mercedes CLK is 5 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 435 litres | 460 litres | |
|
Chrysler Sebring has more luggage space. Mercedes CLK has 25 litres less trunk space than the Chrysler Sebring. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.8 meters | no data | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`030 | no data | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | average | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 2800 | 2000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mercedes CLK has
|
Chrysler Sebring has
| |