Aston Martin DB11
Car comparison
Aston Martin DB11 4.0 V8vsMercedes-Benz AMG GT (C190) · Facelift 2017 4.0 V8
Compare specs, acceleration, fuel consumption, dimensions, practicality, and estimated running costs side by side.
New comparisonMercedes-Benz AMG GT (C190) · Facelift 2017
4.0 V8
Comparison overview
Use the estimates as comparison hints and verify exact figures before making decisions.
Best choices
Aston Martin DB11 4.0 V8
- Quickest 0-100 km/h4.0 s
- Fastest top speed315 km/h196 mph Unrestricted300 km/h186 mph Restricted
- Most powerful503 hp375 kW
- Highest torque675 Nm498 lb-ft
- Best estimated range722 km449 mi
- Best overall score78/100
- Best performance score90/100
- Best practicality score51/100
Mercedes-Benz AMG GT (C190) Facelift 2017 4.0 V8
- Lightest1,540 kg3,395 lb
- Best power-to-weight309 hp/t230 kW/t3.2 kg/hp
- Lowest combined fuel consumption9.6 L/100 km24.5 mpg US29.4 mpg UK
- Best economy score81/100
Specification comparison
| Model | Aston MartinDB114.0 V8 | Mercedes-BenzAMG GT (C190)Facelift 20174.0 V8 |
|---|---|---|
| Power | 503hp375kW | 476hp355kW |
| Torque | 675Nm498lb-ft | 630Nm465lb-ft |
| Curb weight | 1,760kg3,880lb | 1,540kg3,395lb |
| Gross weight | - | 1,890kg4,167lb |
| Top speed | Unrestricted 315 km/h196 mph Restricted 300 km/h186 mph Calculated | 304 km/h 189 mph |
| To 99% top speed | 62.7s99% target: 312 km/h / 194 mph Calculated | 55.9s99% target: 301 km/h / 187 mph Calculated |
| 0-100 km/h | 4.0s | 4.0s |
| 0-200 km/h | 11.7s Calculated | 11.6s Calculated |
| 0-60 mph | 3.8s Calculated | 3.8s Calculated |
| Fuel consumption | 10.8L/100 km21.8mpg US26.2mpg UK | 9.6L/100 km24.5mpg US29.4mpg UK |
| Fuel consumption city | - | 12.5L/100 km18.8mpg US22.6mpg UK |
| Fuel consumption highway | - | 7.9L/100 km29.8mpg US35.8mpg UK |
| Quarter mile | 11.8s Calculated | 11.8s Calculated |
| Power-to-weight | 286hp/t213kW/t130hp/1000 lb Calculated | 309hp/t230kW/t140hp/1000 lb Calculated |
| Torque-to-weight | 384Nm/t257lb-ft/ton Calculated | 409Nm/t274lb-ft/ton Calculated |
| Estimated range | 722km449mi Calculated | 677km421mi Calculated |
| Displacement | 3,982cc243cu in | 3,982cc243cu in |
| Length | 4,750mm187in | 4,544mm179in |
| Width | 1,950mm77in | - |
| Height | 1,290mm51in | 1,287mm51in |
| Wheelbase | 2,805mm110in | 2,630mm104in |
| Front track | - | 1,684mm66in |
| Ground clearance | - | 96mm4in |
| Doors | 2 | 2 |
| Seats | 4 | 2 |
| Fuel tank | 78L | 65L |
| CO2 emissions | - | 224g/km |
Performance charts
Use the estimates as comparison hints and verify exact figures before making decisions.
Dyno simulation
Estimated stock-style power and torque curves by engine speed.
- Aston Martin DB11 4.0 V8: Power / Torque
- Mercedes-Benz AMG GT (C190) Facelift 2017 4.0 V8: Power / Torque
| Vehicle | Peak power RPM | Peak torque RPM | Max engine speed |
|---|---|---|---|
| Aston MartinDB114.0 V8 | 6,000 rpm | 2,000-5,000 rpm | 7,200 rpm |
| Mercedes-BenzAMG GT (C190)Facelift 20174.0 V8 | 6,000 rpm | 1,700-5,000 rpm | 6,250 rpm |
Acceleration curve
Estimated speed over time for selected vehicles.
| Metric | Aston MartinDB114.0 V8 | Mercedes-BenzAMG GT (C190)Facelift 20174.0 V8 |
|---|---|---|
| Acceleration checkpoints | ||
0-60 mph 0-97 km/h | 3.8 s | 3.8 s |
0-100 km/h 0-62 mph | 4.0 s | 4.0 s |
0-200 km/h 0-124 mph | 11.7 s | 11.6 s |
| Top speed | Unrestricted 315 km/h196 mph Restricted 300 km/h186 mph Likely limited | 304 km/h 189 mph |
| Drag race simulation | ||
60 ft 18 m | 2.0 s | 2.1 s |
330 ft 101 m | 5.3 s | 5.3 s |
1/8 mile 201 m | 7.8 s | 7.8 s |
1000 ft 305 m | 10.0 s | 10.0 s |
1/4 mile 402 m | 11.8 s | 11.8 s |
Trap speed 1/4 mile 402 m | 201 km/h 125 mph | 202 km/h 125 mph |
Power comparison
Bar comparison chart for Power. Higher is better · hp / kW
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| Aston MartinDB114.0 V8 | 503 hp 375 kW |
| Mercedes-BenzAMG GT (C190)Facelift 20174.0 V8 | 476 hp 355 kW |
Aston Martin DB11 4.0 V8 has 27 hp more than Mercedes-Benz AMG GT (C190) Facelift 2017 4.0 V8.
The biggest power difference is between Mercedes-Benz AMG GT (C190) Facelift 2017 4.0 V8 and Aston Martin DB11 4.0 V8: 27 hp (20 kW).
Torque comparison
Bar comparison chart for Torque. Higher is better · Nm / lb-ft
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| Aston MartinDB114.0 V8 | 675 Nm 498 lb-ft |
| Mercedes-BenzAMG GT (C190)Facelift 20174.0 V8 | 630 Nm 465 lb-ft |
Curb weight comparison
Bar comparison chart for Curb weight. Lower is better · kg / lb
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| Aston MartinDB114.0 V8 | 1,760 kg 3,880 lb |
| Mercedes-BenzAMG GT (C190)Facelift 20174.0 V8 | 1,540 kg 3,395 lb |
Top speed without limiter comparison
Bar comparison chart for Top speed without limiter. Higher is better · km/h / mph
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| Aston MartinDB114.0 V8 | Unrestricted 315 km/h196 mph Restricted 300 km/h186 mph |
| Mercedes-BenzAMG GT (C190)Facelift 20174.0 V8 | 304 km/h 189 mph |
0-100 km/h comparison
Bar comparison chart for 0-100 km/h. Lower is better · seconds
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| Aston MartinDB114.0 V8 | 4.0 s |
| Mercedes-BenzAMG GT (C190)Facelift 20174.0 V8 | 4.0 s |
Fuel consumption comparison
Bar comparison chart for Fuel consumption. Lower is better · L/100 km / mpg US / mpg UK
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| Aston MartinDB114.0 V8 | 10.8 L/100 km 21.8 mpg US 26.2 mpg UK |
| Mercedes-BenzAMG GT (C190)Facelift 20174.0 V8 | 9.6 L/100 km 24.5 mpg US 29.4 mpg UK |
The biggest fuel consumption difference is between Mercedes-Benz AMG GT (C190) Facelift 2017 4.0 V8 and Aston Martin DB11 4.0 V8: 1.2 L/100 km.
Power-to-weight comparison
Bar comparison chart for Power-to-weight. Higher is better · hp/t / kW/t
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| Aston MartinDB114.0 V8 | 286 hp/t 213 kW/t 3.5 kg/hp |
| Mercedes-BenzAMG GT (C190)Facelift 20174.0 V8 | 309 hp/t 230 kW/t 3.2 kg/hp |
Estimated range comparison
Bar comparison chart for Estimated range. Higher is better · km / mi
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| Aston MartinDB114.0 V8 | 722 km 449 mi |
| Mercedes-BenzAMG GT (C190)Facelift 20174.0 V8 | 677 km 421 mi |
Performance spider chart
Radar chart comparing normalized performance and fuel-consumption scores.
| Vehicle | Power | Acceleration | Top speed |
|---|---|---|---|
| Aston MartinDB114.0 V8 | 503 hp 375 kW | 4.0 s | Unrestricted 315 km/h196 mph Restricted 300 km/h186 mph |
| Mercedes-BenzAMG GT (C190)Facelift 20174.0 V8 | 476 hp 355 kW | 4.0 s | 304 km/h 189 mph |
Most attractive quadrant
Scatter chart with performance score on the X axis and practicality score on the Y axis.
| Vehicle | Performance score | Practicality score | ||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aston MartinDB114.0 V8 |
|
| ||||||||||||||
| Mercedes-BenzAMG GT (C190)Facelift 20174.0 V8 |
|
| ||||||||||||||
Performance vs fuel economy
Cars closer to the top-right corner combine stronger performance with better fuel economy scores.
| Vehicle | Performance score | Fuel economy score | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aston MartinDB114.0 V8 |
| 10.8 L/100 km 21.8 mpg US 26.2 mpg UK | ||||||
| Mercedes-BenzAMG GT (C190)Facelift 20174.0 V8 |
| 9.6 L/100 km 24.5 mpg US 29.4 mpg UK | ||||||
Mercedes-Benz AMG GT (C190) Facelift 2017 4.0 V8 is closest to the top-right balance target for performance and fuel economy.
Acceleration vs fuel consumption
Cars closer to the lower-left corner offer a better mix of quick acceleration and low fuel consumption.
| Vehicle | Fuel consumption, L/100 km | 0-100 km/h, s |
|---|---|---|
| Aston MartinDB114.0 V8 | 10.8 L/100 km 21.8 mpg US 26.2 mpg UK | 4.0 s |
| Mercedes-BenzAMG GT (C190)Facelift 20174.0 V8 | 9.6 L/100 km 24.5 mpg US 29.4 mpg UK | 4.0 s |
Power-to-weight vs fuel consumption
The shaded area favors higher power-to-weight with lower combined fuel consumption.
| Vehicle | Power-to-weight, hp/t | Fuel consumption, L/100 km |
|---|---|---|
| Aston MartinDB114.0 V8 | 286 hp/t 213 kW/t 3.5 kg/hp | 10.8 L/100 km 21.8 mpg US 26.2 mpg UK |
| Mercedes-BenzAMG GT (C190)Facelift 20174.0 V8 | 309 hp/t 230 kW/t 3.2 kg/hp | 9.6 L/100 km 24.5 mpg US 29.4 mpg UK |
Detailed score breakdown
| Vehicle | Aston MartinDB114.0 V8 | Mercedes-BenzAMG GT (C190)Facelift 20174.0 V8 | ||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power | 503 hp 375 kW | 476 hp 355 kW | ||||||||||||||||
| Torque | 675 Nm 498 lb-ft | 630 Nm 465 lb-ft | ||||||||||||||||
| Acceleration | 4.0 s | 4.0 s | ||||||||||||||||
| Top speed | Unrestricted 315 km/h196 mph Restricted 300 km/h186 mph | 304 km/h 189 mph | ||||||||||||||||
| Lightness | 1,760 kg 3,880 lb | 1,540 kg 3,395 lb | ||||||||||||||||
| Fuel consumption | 10.8 L/100 km 21.8 mpg US 26.2 mpg UK | 9.6 L/100 km 24.5 mpg US 29.4 mpg UK | ||||||||||||||||
| Practicality |
|
| ||||||||||||||||
| Range score | 722 km 449 mi | 677 km 421 mi | ||||||||||||||||
| CO2 score | - | 224 g/km | ||||||||||||||||
| Power-to-weight score | 286 hp/t 213 kW/t 3.5 kg/hp | 309 hp/t 230 kW/t 3.2 kg/hp | ||||||||||||||||
| Overall | Fixed score | Fixed score |
Fuel cost and annual usage
Estimate running costs from combined consumption, your annual distance, and the fuel price in your local currency.
Enter the fuel price in your local currency, for example €/L, $/gal, £/L or any other local currency.
LC = Local Currency
| Vehicle | Aston Martin DB11 4.0 V8 | Mercedes-Benz AMG GT (C190) Facelift 2017 4.0 V8 |
|---|---|---|
| Consumption | 10.8 L/100 km21.8 mpg US26.2 mpg UK | 9.6 L/100 km24.5 mpg US29.4 mpg UK |
| Cost / 100 km | 18.90 LC100 km | 16.80 LC100 km |
| Cost / 100 mi | 30.42 LC100 mi | 27.04 LC100 mi |
| Annual fuel used | 1,620 L428 US gal356 UK gal | 1,440 L380 US gal317 UK gal |
| Annual fuel cost | 2,835 LC/year | 2,520 LC/year |
Head-to-head comparisons
Aston Martin DB11 4.0 V8
- Has 27 hp more
- Has 45 Nm more
- Has 11 km/h (7 mph) higher top speed
- Has 45 km (28 mi) more estimated range
Pros
- Quickest 0-100 km/h in this comparison
- Highest top speed
- Most powerful
- Highest torque
- Best estimated range
Cons
- Highest combined fuel consumption
- Heaviest
Mercedes-Benz AMG GT (C190) Facelift 2017 4.0 V8
- Is 220 kg lighter
- Uses 1.2 L/100 km less fuel
- Has 23 hp/t better power-to-weight
Pros
- Lightest
- Lowest combined fuel consumption
- Best power-to-weight ratio
Cons
- Lowest power
- Lowest top speed
Choose cars to compare
Popular comparisons























