Volkswagen Golf 1998 vs Mercedes CLK 1998
| Gearbox: | Manual | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.9 Diesel | 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: | 90 HP | 193 HP | |
| Torque: | 210 NM | 280 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 13.3 seconds | 9.2 seconds | |
|
Mercedes CLK is a more dynamic driving. Volkswagen Golf engine produces 103 HP less power than Mercedes CLK, whereas torque is 70 NM less than Mercedes CLK. Due to the lower power, Volkswagen Golf reaches 100 km/h speed 4.1 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.2 | 10.3 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 5.5 l/100km | 10.8 l/100km | |
|
The Volkswagen Golf is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Volkswagen Golf consumes 5.1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mercedes CLK, which means that by driving the Volkswagen Golf over 15,000 km in a year you can save 765 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Volkswagen Golf consumes 5.3 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mercedes CLK. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 55 litres | 62 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1050 km in combined cycle | 600 km in combined cycle | |
| 1300 km on highway | 810 km on highway | ||
| 1000 km with real consumption | 570 km with real consumption | ||
| Volkswagen Golf gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | |
| Front-wheel drive cars (Volkswagen Golf) 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 | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 610'000 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 Volkswagen Golf engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 13 years | 8 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 8 other car models, including Skoda Octavia, Audi A3, Volkswagen Bora, Seat Leon | Used also on Mercedes SLK | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Volkswagen Golf might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.08 m | 4.57 m | |
| Width: | 1.70 m | 1.72 m | |
| Height: | 1.42 m | 1.38 m | |
|
Volkswagen Golf is smaller, but slightly higher. Volkswagen Golf is 49 cm shorter than the Mercedes CLK, 2 cm narrower, while the height of Volkswagen Golf is 4 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 270 litres | 237 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
448 litres | 350 litres | |
|
Volkswagen Golf has more luggage capacity. Even though the car is shorter, Volkswagen Golf has 33 litres more trunk space than the Mercedes CLK. The Mercedes CLK may have more interior space, so the cabin could be more spacious and more comfortable for the driver and passengers. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Volkswagen Golf (by 98 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.7 meters | 10.7 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`640 | 2`030 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | above average | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 2400 | 3800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Volkswagen Golf has
|
Mercedes CLK has
| |