Mercedes CLK 2005 vs Chrysler PT Cruiser 2004
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.8 Petrol | 2.4 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: | 163 HP | 143 HP | |
| Torque: | 240 NM | 214 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.5 seconds | 12.2 seconds | |
|
Mercedes CLK is more dynamic to drive. Mercedes CLK engine produces 20 HP more power than Chrysler PT Cruiser, whereas torque is 26 NM more than Chrysler PT Cruiser. Thanks to more power Mercedes CLK reaches 100 km/h speed 1.7 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.7 | 10.8 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.8 l/100km | 12.4 l/100km | |
|
The Mercedes CLK is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mercedes CLK consumes 2.1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Chrysler PT Cruiser, which means that by driving the Mercedes CLK over 15,000 km in a year you can save 315 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mercedes CLK consumes 3.6 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Chrysler PT Cruiser. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 62 litres | 57 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 710 km in combined cycle | 520 km in combined cycle | |
| 700 km with real consumption | 450 km with real consumption | ||
| Mercedes CLK gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
| Front-wheel drive cars (Chrysler PT Cruiser) 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: | 13 years | 15 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Mercedes C klase, Mercedes E klase, Mercedes SLK | Installed on at least 7 other car models, including Chrysler Grand Voyager, Chrysler Voyager, Jeep Cherokee, Dodge Grand Caravan | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Chrysler PT Cruiser might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.65 m | 4.29 m | |
| Width: | 1.74 m | 1.75 m | |
| Height: | 1.42 m | 1.54 m | |
| Mercedes CLK is 36 cm longer than the Chrysler PT Cruiser, 1 cm narrower, while the height of Mercedes CLK is 12 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 276 litres | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.8 meters | 12 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mercedes CLK is 1.2 metres less than that of the Chrysler PT Cruiser, which means Mercedes CLK can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | no data | 1`000 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | above average | low | |
| Mercedes CLK has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Chrysler PT Cruiser has serious deffects in 100 percent more cases than Mercedes CLK, so Mercedes CLK quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 7200 | 2600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mercedes CLK has
|
Chrysler PT Cruiser has
| |