Mercedes-Benz CLK (C209)
Car comparison
Mercedes-Benz CLK (C209) AMG CLK DTM 5.5 V8vsFord GT 5.4 i V8 32V
Compare specs, acceleration, fuel consumption, dimensions, practicality, and estimated running costs side by side.
New comparisonFord GT
5.4 i V8 32V
Comparison overview
Use the estimates as comparison hints and verify exact figures before making decisions.
Best choices
Mercedes-Benz CLK (C209) AMG CLK DTM 5.5 V8
- Fastest top speed335 km/h208 mph Unrestricted320 km/h199 mph Restricted
- Most powerful582 hp434 kW
- Highest torque800 Nm590 lb-ft
- Lowest city consumption19.1 L/100 km12.3 mpg US14.8 mpg UK
- Lowest highway consumption10.6 L/100 km22.2 mpg US26.6 mpg UK
- Best overall score76/100
- Best performance score92/100
- Best economy score70/100
- Best practicality score42/100
Ford GT 5.4 i V8 32V
- Quickest 0-100 km/h3.8 s
- Lightest1,450 kg3,197 lb
- Best power-to-weight350 hp/t261 kW/t2.9 kg/hp
Specification comparison
| Model | Mercedes-BenzCLK (C209)AMG CLK DTM 5.5 V8 | FordGT5.4 i V8 32V |
|---|---|---|
| Power | 582hp434kW | 507hp378kW |
| Torque | 800Nm590lb-ft | 678Nm500lb-ft |
| Curb weight | 1,667kg3,675lb | 1,450kg3,197lb |
| Gross weight | 1,980kg4,365lb | - |
| Top speed | Unrestricted 335 km/h208 mph Restricted 320 km/h199 mph Calculated | 322 km/h 200 mph |
| To 99% top speed | 64.1s99% target: 332 km/h / 206 mph Calculated | 52.5s99% target: 319 km/h / 198 mph Calculated |
| 0-100 km/h | 3.9s | 3.8s |
| 0-200 km/h | 10.9s | 10.3s Calculated |
| 0-60 mph | 3.7s Calculated | 3.6s Calculated |
| Fuel consumption | 13.7L/100 km17.2mpg US20.6mpg UK | - |
| Fuel consumption city | 19.1L/100 km12.3mpg US14.8mpg UK | 30L/100 km7.8mpg US9.4mpg UK |
| Fuel consumption highway | 10.6L/100 km22.2mpg US26.6mpg UK | 14L/100 km16.8mpg US20.2mpg UK |
| Quarter mile | 11.6s Calculated | 11.4s Calculated |
| Power-to-weight | 349hp/t260kW/t158hp/1000 lb Calculated | 350hp/t261kW/t159hp/1000 lb Calculated |
| Torque-to-weight | 480Nm/t321lb-ft/ton Calculated | 468Nm/t313lb-ft/ton Calculated |
| Estimated range | 672km417mi Calculated | - |
| Displacement | 5,439cc332cu in | 5,409cc330cu in |
| Length | 4,650mm183in | 4,645mm183in |
| Width | 1,800mm71in | 1,955mm77in |
| Height | 1,360mm54in | 1,125mm44in |
| Wheelbase | 2,715mm107in | 2,710mm107in |
| Front track | - | 1,600mm63in |
| Rear track | - | 1,620mm64in |
| Trunk volume | 395L | - |
| Doors | 2 | 2 |
| Seats | 2 | 2 |
| Fuel tank | 92L | 66L |
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.
- Mercedes-Benz CLK (C209) AMG CLK DTM 5.5 V8: Power / Torque
- Ford GT 5.4 i V8 32V: Power / Torque
| Vehicle | Peak power RPM | Peak torque RPM | Max engine speed |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mercedes-BenzCLK (C209)AMG CLK DTM 5.5 V8 | 6,100 rpm | 3,500 rpm | 7,000 rpm |
| FordGT5.4 i V8 32V | 6,000 rpm | 4,500 rpm | 6,250 rpm |
Acceleration curve
Estimated speed over time for selected vehicles.
| Metric | Mercedes-BenzCLK (C209)AMG CLK DTM 5.5 V8 | FordGT5.4 i V8 32V |
|---|---|---|
| Acceleration checkpoints | ||
0-60 mph 0-97 km/h | 3.7 s | 3.6 s |
0-100 km/h 0-62 mph | 3.9 s | 3.8 s |
0-200 km/h 0-124 mph | 10.9 s | 10.3 s |
0-200 mph 0-322 km/h | 43.7 s | - |
| Top speed | Unrestricted 335 km/h208 mph Restricted 320 km/h199 mph Limited | 322 km/h 200 mph |
| Drag race simulation | ||
60 ft 18 m | 2.0 s | 2.1 s |
330 ft 101 m | 5.2 s | 5.2 s |
1/8 mile 201 m | 7.7 s | 7.6 s |
1000 ft 305 m | 9.9 s | 9.7 s |
1/4 mile 402 m | 11.6 s | 11.4 s |
Trap speed 1/4 mile 402 m | 207 km/h 129 mph | 211 km/h 131 mph |
Power comparison
Bar comparison chart for Power. Higher is better · hp / kW
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| Mercedes-BenzCLK (C209)AMG CLK DTM 5.5 V8 | 582 hp 434 kW |
| FordGT5.4 i V8 32V | 507 hp 378 kW |
Mercedes-Benz CLK (C209) AMG CLK DTM 5.5 V8 has 75 hp more than Ford GT 5.4 i V8 32V.
The biggest power difference is between Ford GT 5.4 i V8 32V and Mercedes-Benz CLK (C209) AMG CLK DTM 5.5 V8: 75 hp (56 kW).
Torque comparison
Bar comparison chart for Torque. Higher is better · Nm / lb-ft
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| Mercedes-BenzCLK (C209)AMG CLK DTM 5.5 V8 | 800 Nm 590 lb-ft |
| FordGT5.4 i V8 32V | 678 Nm 500 lb-ft |
Curb weight comparison
Bar comparison chart for Curb weight. Lower is better · kg / lb
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| Mercedes-BenzCLK (C209)AMG CLK DTM 5.5 V8 | 1,667 kg 3,675 lb |
| FordGT5.4 i V8 32V | 1,450 kg 3,197 lb |
Top speed without limiter comparison
Bar comparison chart for Top speed without limiter. Higher is better · km/h / mph
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| Mercedes-BenzCLK (C209)AMG CLK DTM 5.5 V8 | Unrestricted 335 km/h208 mph Restricted 320 km/h199 mph |
| FordGT5.4 i V8 32V | 322 km/h 200 mph |
0-100 km/h comparison
Bar comparison chart for 0-100 km/h. Lower is better · seconds
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| Mercedes-BenzCLK (C209)AMG CLK DTM 5.5 V8 | 3.9 s |
| FordGT5.4 i V8 32V | 3.8 s |
Although Mercedes-Benz CLK (C209) AMG CLK DTM 5.5 V8 has more power, Ford GT 5.4 i V8 32V is quicker from 0-100 km/h.
The biggest 0-100 km/h difference is between Ford GT 5.4 i V8 32V and Mercedes-Benz CLK (C209) AMG CLK DTM 5.5 V8: 0.1 s.
Power-to-weight comparison
Bar comparison chart for Power-to-weight. Higher is better · hp/t / kW/t
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| Mercedes-BenzCLK (C209)AMG CLK DTM 5.5 V8 | 349 hp/t 260 kW/t 2.9 kg/hp |
| FordGT5.4 i V8 32V | 350 hp/t 261 kW/t 2.9 kg/hp |
Performance spider chart
Radar chart comparing normalized performance and fuel-consumption scores.
| Vehicle | Power | Acceleration | Top speed |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mercedes-BenzCLK (C209)AMG CLK DTM 5.5 V8 | 582 hp 434 kW | 3.9 s | Unrestricted 335 km/h208 mph Restricted 320 km/h199 mph |
| FordGT5.4 i V8 32V | 507 hp 378 kW | 3.8 s | 322 km/h 200 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 | ||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mercedes-BenzCLK (C209)AMG CLK DTM 5.5 V8 |
|
| ||||||||||||||
| FordGT5.4 i V8 32V |
|
| ||||||||||||||
Detailed score breakdown
| Vehicle | Mercedes-BenzCLK (C209)AMG CLK DTM 5.5 V8 | FordGT5.4 i V8 32V | ||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power | 582 hp 434 kW | 507 hp 378 kW | ||||||||||||||||
| Torque | 800 Nm 590 lb-ft | 678 Nm 500 lb-ft | ||||||||||||||||
| Acceleration | 3.9 s | 3.8 s | ||||||||||||||||
| Top speed | Unrestricted 335 km/h208 mph Restricted 320 km/h199 mph | 322 km/h 200 mph | ||||||||||||||||
| Lightness | 1,667 kg 3,675 lb | 1,450 kg 3,197 lb | ||||||||||||||||
| Fuel consumption | 13.7 L/100 km 17.2 mpg US 20.6 mpg UK | - | ||||||||||||||||
| Practicality |
|
| ||||||||||||||||
| Range score | 672 km 417 mi | - | ||||||||||||||||
| Trunk score | 395 L 13.9 cu ft | - | ||||||||||||||||
| Power-to-weight score | 349 hp/t 260 kW/t 2.9 kg/hp | 350 hp/t 261 kW/t 2.9 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 | Mercedes-Benz CLK (C209) AMG CLK DTM 5.5 V8 |
|---|---|
| Consumption | 13.7 L/100 km17.2 mpg US20.6 mpg UK |
| Cost / 100 km | 23.97 LC100 km |
| Cost / 100 mi | 38.58 LC100 mi |
| Annual fuel used | 2,055 L543 US gal452 UK gal |
| Annual fuel cost | 3,596 LC/year |
Head-to-head comparisons
Mercedes-Benz CLK (C209) AMG CLK DTM 5.5 V8
- Has 75 hp more
- Has 122 Nm more
- Has 13 km/h (8 mph) higher top speed
Pros
- Highest top speed
- Most powerful
- Highest torque
Cons
- Slowest 0-100 km/h
- Heaviest
Ford GT 5.4 i V8 32V
- Is 217 kg lighter
- Is 0.1 s quicker from 0-100 km/h
- Has 1 hp/t better power-to-weight
Pros
- Quickest 0-100 km/h in this comparison
- Lightest
- Best power-to-weight ratio
Cons
- Lowest power
- Lowest top speed
Choose cars to compare
Popular comparisons























