Mercedes CLK 1999 vs Chrysler Sebring 2000
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 3.2 Petrol | 3.0 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 224 HP | 203 HP | |
| Torque: | 315 NM | 278 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 7.4 seconds | 10 seconds | |
|
Mercedes CLK is more dynamic to drive. Mercedes CLK engine produces 21 HP more power than Chrysler Sebring, whereas torque is 37 NM more than Chrysler Sebring. Thanks to more power Mercedes CLK reaches 100 km/h speed 2.6 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 10.1 | 10.0 | |
| Mercedes CLK consumes 0.1 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 15 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 62 litres | 62 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 610 km in combined cycle | 620 km in combined cycle | |
| 860 km on highway | 760 km on highway | ||
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: | 4.57 m | 4.83 m | |
| Width: | 1.72 m | 1.79 m | |
| Height: | 1.37 m | 1.37 m | |
|
Mercedes CLK is smaller, but slightly higher. Mercedes CLK is 26 cm shorter than the Chrysler Sebring, 7 cm narrower the height of the cars does not differ significantly. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 420 litres | 460 litres | |
|
Chrysler Sebring has more luggage space. Mercedes CLK has 40 litres less trunk space than the Chrysler Sebring. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.7 meters | no data | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`920 | no data | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | average | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 2000 | 2000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mercedes CLK has
|
Chrysler Sebring has
| |