Mercedes CLK 2002 vs Toyota Celica 2002
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.6 Petrol | 1.8 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 170 HP | 192 HP | |
| Torque: | 240 NM | 180 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.5 seconds | 7.4 seconds | |
|
Toyota Celica is a more dynamic driving. Mercedes CLK engine produces 22 HP less power than Toyota Celica, but torque is 60 NM more than Toyota Celica. Due to the lower power, Mercedes CLK reaches 100 km/h speed 2.1 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 10.4 | 8.4 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 10.6 l/100km | 8.6 l/100km | |
|
The Toyota Celica is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mercedes CLK consumes 2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Toyota Celica, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mercedes CLK could require 300 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mercedes CLK consumes 2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Toyota Celica. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 62 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 590 km in combined cycle | 650 km in combined cycle | |
| 820 km on highway | 830 km on highway | ||
| 580 km with real consumption | 630 km with real consumption | ||
| Toyota Celica gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
| Front-wheel drive cars (Toyota Celica) 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 | 280'000 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: | 10 years | 12 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Mercedes C klase, Mercedes E klase | Used also on Toyota Corolla | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Mercedes CLK might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| 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: | 4.64 m | 4.35 m | |
| Width: | 1.74 m | 1.74 m | |
| Height: | 1.41 m | 1.32 m | |
| Mercedes CLK is 29 cm longer than the Toyota Celica, width is practically the same , while the height of Mercedes CLK is 9 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 435 litres | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.8 meters | 10.4 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mercedes CLK is 0.4 metres more than that of the Toyota Celica, which means Mercedes CLK can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`030 | 1`200 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | average | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 3000 | 2600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mercedes CLK has
|
Toyota Celica has
| |