Mercedes CLK 2000 vs Mercedes CLK 2003
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 1.8 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 163 HP | 163 HP | |
| Torque: | 230 NM | 240 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.4 seconds | 10.5 seconds | |
| Mercedes CLK 2000 and Mercedes CLK 2003 have the same engine power, but Mercedes CLK 2000 torque is 10 NM less than Mercedes CLK 2003. Mercedes CLK 2000 reaches 100 km/h speed 0.1 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 9.4 | 9.2 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 9.6 l/100km | 9.2 l/100km | |
|
By specification Mercedes CLK 2000 consumes 0.2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mercedes CLK 2003, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mercedes CLK 2000 could require 30 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mercedes CLK 2000 consumes 0.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mercedes CLK 2003. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 62 litres | 62 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 650 km in combined cycle | 670 km in combined cycle | |
| 880 km on highway | 920 km on highway | ||
| 640 km with real consumption | 670 km with real consumption | ||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.57 m | 4.64 m | |
| Width: | 1.72 m | 1.74 m | |
| Height: | 1.38 m | 1.41 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Mercedes CLK 2000 is 7 cm shorter than the Mercedes CLK 2003, 2 cm narrower, while the height of Mercedes CLK 2000 is 3 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | 276 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 390 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.7 meters | 10.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mercedes CLK 2000 is 0.1 metres less than that of the Mercedes CLK 2003. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`020 | 2`135 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | average | average | |
| Average price (€): | 4400 | 6000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mercedes CLK has
|
| |