Mercedes CLK 2003 vs Volvo C70 1999
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 3.2 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 218 HP | 163 HP | |
| Torque: | 310 NM | 230 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 8.2 seconds | 9.9 seconds | |
|
Mercedes CLK is more dynamic to drive. Mercedes CLK engine produces 55 HP more power than Volvo C70, whereas torque is 80 NM more than Volvo C70. Thanks to more power Mercedes CLK reaches 100 km/h speed 1.7 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 10.9 | 9.7 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 11.1 l/100km | 9.7 l/100km | |
|
The Volvo C70 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mercedes CLK consumes 1.2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volvo C70, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mercedes CLK could require 180 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mercedes CLK consumes 1.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volvo C70. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 62 litres | 68 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 560 km in combined cycle | 700 km in combined cycle | |
| 800 km on highway | 910 km on highway | ||
| 550 km with real consumption | 700 km with real consumption | ||
| Volvo C70 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
| Front-wheel drive cars (Volvo C70) 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 | 4.72 m | |
| Width: | 1.74 m | 1.82 m | |
| Height: | 1.41 m | 1.43 m | |
|
Mercedes CLK is smaller. Mercedes CLK is 8 cm shorter than the Volvo C70, 8 cm narrower, while the height of Mercedes CLK is 2 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 276 litres | 262 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
390 litres | no data | |
| Even though the car is shorter, Mercedes CLK has 14 litres more trunk space than the Volvo C70. The Volvo C70 may have more interior space, so the cabin could be more spacious and more comfortable for the driver and passengers. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.8 meters | 11.7 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mercedes CLK is 0.9 metres less than that of the Volvo C70, which means Mercedes CLK can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`185 | 2`000 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | below average | average | |
| Volvo C70 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Mercedes CLK has serious deffects in 30 percent more cases than Volvo C70, so Volvo C70 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 6000 | 2200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mercedes CLK has
|
Volvo C70 has
| |