Mercedes CLK 2000 vs Mercedes CLK 2003
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.3 Petrol | 2.6 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 197 HP | 170 HP | |
| Torque: | 280 NM | 240 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 8.8 seconds | 9.7 seconds | |
|
Mercedes CLK 2000 is more dynamic to drive. Mercedes CLK 2000 engine produces 27 HP more power than Mercedes CLK 2003, whereas torque is 40 NM more than Mercedes CLK 2003. Thanks to more power Mercedes CLK 2000 reaches 100 km/h speed 0.9 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 9.6 | 11.2 | |
|
The Mercedes CLK 2000 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Mercedes CLK 2000 consumes 1.6 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mercedes CLK 2003, which means that by driving the Mercedes CLK 2000 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 240 litres of fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 62 litres | 62 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 640 km in combined cycle | 550 km in combined cycle | |
| 860 km on highway | 780 km on highway | ||
| Mercedes CLK 2000 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
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`050 | 2`155 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | average | average | |
| Average price (€): | 4400 | 6000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mercedes CLK has
|
| |