Alfa Romeo 156 2002 vs Mercedes SLK 1996
| Body: | Sedan | Cabrio | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
| Engine: | 2.5 Petrol | 2.3 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing chain | |
| Timing belt usually needs to be replaced more often than the chain, but it is usually significantly cheaper. Timing belt motors are generally quieter and less vibrating than chain motors. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 192 HP | 193 HP | |
| Torque: | 218 NM | 280 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 8.5 seconds | 7.3 seconds | |
|
Mercedes SLK is a more dynamic driving. Alfa Romeo 156 engine produces 1 HP less power than Mercedes SLK, whereas torque is 62 NM less than Mercedes SLK. Due to the lower power, Alfa Romeo 156 reaches 100 km/h speed 1.2 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 11.9 | 9.5 | |
|
The Mercedes SLK is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Alfa Romeo 156 consumes 2.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mercedes SLK, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Alfa Romeo 156 could require 360 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 63 litres | 53 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 520 km in combined cycle | 550 km in combined cycle | |
| 730 km on highway | 750 km on highway | ||
| Mercedes SLK gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | |
| Front-wheel drive cars (Alfa Romeo 156) 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 SLK) 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 | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 390'000 km | 520'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used, but under equal conditions the average life of a Mercedes SLK engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 5 years | 8 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | Used also on Mercedes CLK | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Mercedes SLK might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.43 m | 4.00 m | |
| Width: | 1.74 m | 1.72 m | |
| Height: | 1.42 m | 1.29 m | |
|
Alfa Romeo 156 is larger. Alfa Romeo 156 is 43 cm longer than the Mercedes SLK, 2 cm wider, while the height of Alfa Romeo 156 is 13 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 380 litres | 145 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down, if possible |
no data | 348 litres | |
|
Alfa Romeo 156 has more luggage capacity. Alfa Romeo 156 has 235 litres more trunk space than the Mercedes SLK. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.6 meters | 10.5 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Alfa Romeo 156 is 1.1 metres more than that of the Mercedes SLK, which means Alfa Romeo 156 can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight: | 1`850 kg | no data | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | low | high | |
| Mercedes SLK has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Alfa Romeo 156 has serious deffects in 55 percent more cases than Mercedes SLK, so Mercedes SLK quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 4400 | 4000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Alfa Romeo 156 has
|
Mercedes SLK has
| |