Mercedes CLK 2002 vs Citroen Xsara 2000
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.6 Petrol | 1.6 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing belt | |
| Engine chain usually needs to be replaced less often than the timing belt, but the cost of replacing the chain is usually higher. Chain motors are considered to be more reliable, but noisier and more vibration generating. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 170 HP | 110 HP | |
| Torque: | 240 NM | 147 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.5 seconds | 9.7 seconds | |
|
Mercedes CLK is more dynamic to drive. Mercedes CLK engine produces 60 HP more power than Citroen Xsara, whereas torque is 93 NM more than Citroen Xsara. Thanks to more power Mercedes CLK reaches 100 km/h speed 0.2 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 10.4 | 6.9 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 10.6 l/100km | 7.4 l/100km | |
|
The Citroen Xsara is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mercedes CLK consumes 3.5 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Citroen Xsara, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mercedes CLK could require 525 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mercedes CLK consumes 3.2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Citroen Xsara. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 62 litres | 54 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 590 km in combined cycle | 780 km in combined cycle | |
| 820 km on highway | 980 km on highway | ||
| 580 km with real consumption | 720 km with real consumption | ||
| Citroen Xsara gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| 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 (Citroen Xsara) 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 | |||
| Engine production duration: | 10 years | 15 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Mercedes C klase, Mercedes E klase | Installed on at least 10 other car models, including Peugeot 307, Citroen C3, Peugeot 206, Peugeot 207 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Citroen Xsara might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Citroen Xsara 2000 1.6 engine: Relatively reliable engine, the main problems tend to be with the engine control electronics. The engine is demanding on fuel quality and fuel consumption is relatively high. It is highly recommended to ... More about Citroen Xsara 2000 1.6 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.64 m | 4.19 m | |
| Width: | 1.74 m | 1.70 m | |
| Height: | 1.41 m | 1.40 m | |
|
Mercedes CLK is larger. Mercedes CLK is 45 cm longer than the Citroen Xsara, 4 cm wider, while the height of Mercedes CLK is 1 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 435 litres | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.8 meters | 10.7 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mercedes CLK is 0.1 metres more than that of the Citroen Xsara. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`030 | 1`100 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | average | average | |
| Citroen Xsara has slightly fewer faults. Deffect rate in annual technical inspection is similar for both cars, it's slightly higher for Mercedes CLK, so Citroen Xsara quality could be a bit better. | |||
| Average price (€): | 2800 | 1000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mercedes CLK has
|
Citroen Xsara has
| |