Mercedes-Benz C-class All-Terrain
Car comparison
Mercedes-Benz C-class All-Terrain C 200vsMercedes-Benz C-class Coupe (C205) C 200
Compare specs, acceleration, fuel consumption, dimensions, practicality, and estimated running costs side by side.
New comparisonMercedes-Benz C-class Coupe (C205)
C 200
Comparison overview
Use the estimates as comparison hints and verify exact figures before making decisions.
Best choices
Mercedes-Benz C-class All-Terrain C 200
- Quickest 0-100 km/h7.5 s
- Fastest top speed231 km/h144 mph
- Most powerful204 hp152 kW
- Highest torque300 Nm221 lb-ft
- Largest trunk490 L
- Best overall score61/100
- Best performance score50/100
- Best practicality score84/100
Mercedes-Benz C-class Coupe (C205) C 200
- Lightest1,520 kg3,351 lb
- Best power-to-weight121 hp/t90 kW/t8.3 kg/hp
- Lowest combined fuel consumption7.1 L/100 km33.1 mpg US39.8 mpg UK
- Best estimated range704 km438 mi
- Best economy score88/100
Specification comparison
| Model | Mercedes-BenzC-class All-TerrainC 200 | Mercedes-BenzC-class Coupe (C205)C 200 |
|---|---|---|
| Power | 204hp152kW | 184hp137kW |
| Torque | 300Nm221lb-ft | 300Nm221lb-ft |
| Curb weight | 1,720kg3,792lb | 1,520kg3,351lb |
| Gross weight | 2,370kg5,225lb | 2,075kg4,575lb |
| Top speed | 231 km/h 144 mph | 229 km/h 142 mph |
| To 99% top speed | 74.3s99% target: 229 km/h / 142 mph Calculated | 90.7s99% target: 227 km/h / 141 mph Calculated |
| 0-100 km/h | 7.5s | 7.5s |
| 0-200 km/h | 29.9s Calculated | 34.8s Calculated |
| 0-60 mph | 7.1s Calculated | 7.1s Calculated |
| Fuel consumption | 7.6L/100 km30.9mpg US37.2mpg UK | 7.1L/100 km33.1mpg US39.8mpg UK |
| Fuel consumption city | - | 9.1L/100 km25.8mpg US31.0mpg UK |
| Fuel consumption highway | - | 6L/100 km39.2mpg US47.1mpg UK |
| Quarter mile | 15.4s Calculated | 15.4s Calculated |
| Power-to-weight | 119hp/t88kW/t54hp/1000 lb Calculated | 121hp/t90kW/t55hp/1000 lb Calculated |
| Torque-to-weight | 174Nm/t117lb-ft/ton Calculated | 197Nm/t132lb-ft/ton Calculated |
| Estimated range | 658km409mi Calculated | 704km438mi Calculated |
| Displacement | 1,496cc91cu in | 1,991cc121cu in |
| Length | 4,755mm187in | 4,686mm184in |
| Width | 1,841mm72in | 1,810mm71in |
| Height | 1,494mm59in | 1,405mm55in |
| Wheelbase | 2,865mm113in | 2,840mm112in |
| Front track | 1,584mm62in | 1,563mm62in |
| Rear track | 1,582mm62in | 1,546mm61in |
| Trunk volume | 490L | 400L |
| Max trunk volume | 1,510L | - |
| Doors | 5 | 2 |
| Seats | 5 | 4 |
| Fuel tank | 50L | 50L |
| CO2 emissions | - | 162g/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.
- Mercedes-Benz C-class All-Terrain C 200: Power / Torque
- Mercedes-Benz C-class Coupe (C205) C 200: Power / Torque
| Vehicle | Peak power RPM | Peak torque RPM | Max engine speed |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mercedes-BenzC-class All-TerrainC 200 | 5,800-6,100 rpm | 1,800-4,000 rpm | 6,350 rpm |
| Mercedes-BenzC-class Coupe (C205)C 200 | 5,500 rpm | 1,200-4,000 rpm | 5,750 rpm |
Acceleration curve
Estimated speed over time for selected vehicles.
| Metric | Mercedes-BenzC-class All-TerrainC 200 | Mercedes-BenzC-class Coupe (C205)C 200 |
|---|---|---|
| Acceleration checkpoints | ||
0-60 mph 0-97 km/h | 7.1 s | 7.1 s |
0-100 km/h 0-62 mph | 7.5 s | 7.5 s |
0-200 km/h 0-124 mph | 29.9 s | 34.8 s |
| Top speed | 231 km/h 144 mph | 229 km/h 142 mph |
| Drag race simulation | ||
60 ft 18 m | 2.7 s | 2.5 s |
330 ft 101 m | 6.8 s | 6.6 s |
1/8 mile 201 m | 10.2 s | 10.0 s |
1000 ft 305 m | 13.0 s | 13.0 s |
1/4 mile 402 m | 15.4 s | 15.4 s |
Trap speed 1/4 mile 402 m | 154 km/h 95 mph | 149 km/h 92 mph |
Power comparison
Bar comparison chart for Power. Higher is better · hp / kW
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| Mercedes-BenzC-class All-TerrainC 200 | 204 hp 152 kW |
| Mercedes-BenzC-class Coupe (C205)C 200 | 184 hp 137 kW |
Mercedes-Benz C-class All-Terrain C 200 has 20 hp more than Mercedes-Benz C-class Coupe (C205) C 200.
The biggest power difference is between Mercedes-Benz C-class Coupe (C205) C 200 and Mercedes-Benz C-class All-Terrain C 200: 20 hp (15 kW).
Torque comparison
Bar comparison chart for Torque. Higher is better · Nm / lb-ft
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| Mercedes-BenzC-class All-TerrainC 200 | 300 Nm 221 lb-ft |
| Mercedes-BenzC-class Coupe (C205)C 200 | 300 Nm 221 lb-ft |
Curb weight comparison
Bar comparison chart for Curb weight. Lower is better · kg / lb
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| Mercedes-BenzC-class All-TerrainC 200 | 1,720 kg 3,792 lb |
| Mercedes-BenzC-class Coupe (C205)C 200 | 1,520 kg 3,351 lb |
Top speed without limiter comparison
Bar comparison chart for Top speed without limiter. Higher is better · km/h / mph
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| Mercedes-BenzC-class All-TerrainC 200 | 231 km/h 144 mph |
| Mercedes-BenzC-class Coupe (C205)C 200 | 229 km/h 142 mph |
0-100 km/h comparison
Bar comparison chart for 0-100 km/h. Lower is better · seconds
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| Mercedes-BenzC-class All-TerrainC 200 | 7.5 s |
| Mercedes-BenzC-class Coupe (C205)C 200 | 7.5 s |
Fuel consumption comparison
Bar comparison chart for Fuel consumption. Lower is better · L/100 km / mpg US / mpg UK
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| Mercedes-BenzC-class All-TerrainC 200 | 7.6 L/100 km 30.9 mpg US 37.2 mpg UK |
| Mercedes-BenzC-class Coupe (C205)C 200 | 7.1 L/100 km 33.1 mpg US 39.8 mpg UK |
The biggest fuel consumption difference is between Mercedes-Benz C-class Coupe (C205) C 200 and Mercedes-Benz C-class All-Terrain C 200: 0.5 L/100 km.
Power-to-weight comparison
Bar comparison chart for Power-to-weight. Higher is better · hp/t / kW/t
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| Mercedes-BenzC-class All-TerrainC 200 | 119 hp/t 88 kW/t 8.4 kg/hp |
| Mercedes-BenzC-class Coupe (C205)C 200 | 121 hp/t 90 kW/t 8.3 kg/hp |
Estimated range comparison
Bar comparison chart for Estimated range. Higher is better · km / mi
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| Mercedes-BenzC-class All-TerrainC 200 | 658 km 409 mi |
| Mercedes-BenzC-class Coupe (C205)C 200 | 704 km 438 mi |
Performance spider chart
Radar chart comparing normalized performance and fuel-consumption scores.
| Vehicle | Power | Acceleration | Top speed |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mercedes-BenzC-class All-TerrainC 200 | 204 hp 152 kW | 7.5 s | 231 km/h 144 mph |
| Mercedes-BenzC-class Coupe (C205)C 200 | 184 hp 137 kW | 7.5 s | 229 km/h 142 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-BenzC-class All-TerrainC 200 |
|
| ||||||||||||||
| Mercedes-BenzC-class Coupe (C205)C 200 |
|
| ||||||||||||||
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 | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mercedes-BenzC-class All-TerrainC 200 |
| 7.6 L/100 km 30.9 mpg US 37.2 mpg UK | ||||||
| Mercedes-BenzC-class Coupe (C205)C 200 |
| 7.1 L/100 km 33.1 mpg US 39.8 mpg UK | ||||||
Mercedes-Benz C-class Coupe (C205) C 200 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 |
|---|---|---|
| Mercedes-BenzC-class All-TerrainC 200 | 7.6 L/100 km 30.9 mpg US 37.2 mpg UK | 7.5 s |
| Mercedes-BenzC-class Coupe (C205)C 200 | 7.1 L/100 km 33.1 mpg US 39.8 mpg UK | 7.5 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 |
|---|---|---|
| Mercedes-BenzC-class All-TerrainC 200 | 119 hp/t 88 kW/t 8.4 kg/hp | 7.6 L/100 km 30.9 mpg US 37.2 mpg UK |
| Mercedes-BenzC-class Coupe (C205)C 200 | 121 hp/t 90 kW/t 8.3 kg/hp | 7.1 L/100 km 33.1 mpg US 39.8 mpg UK |
Detailed score breakdown
| Vehicle | Mercedes-BenzC-class All-TerrainC 200 | Mercedes-BenzC-class Coupe (C205)C 200 | ||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power | 204 hp 152 kW | 184 hp 137 kW | ||||||||||||||||
| Torque | 300 Nm 221 lb-ft | 300 Nm 221 lb-ft | ||||||||||||||||
| Acceleration | 7.5 s | 7.5 s | ||||||||||||||||
| Top speed | 231 km/h 144 mph | 229 km/h 142 mph | ||||||||||||||||
| Lightness | 1,720 kg 3,792 lb | 1,520 kg 3,351 lb | ||||||||||||||||
| Fuel consumption | 7.6 L/100 km 30.9 mpg US 37.2 mpg UK | 7.1 L/100 km 33.1 mpg US 39.8 mpg UK | ||||||||||||||||
| Practicality |
|
| ||||||||||||||||
| Range score | 658 km 409 mi | 704 km 438 mi | ||||||||||||||||
| CO2 score | - | 162 g/km | ||||||||||||||||
| Trunk score | 490 L 17.3 cu ft | 400 L 14.1 cu ft | ||||||||||||||||
| Power-to-weight score | 119 hp/t 88 kW/t 8.4 kg/hp | 121 hp/t 90 kW/t 8.3 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 C-class All-Terrain C 200 | Mercedes-Benz C-class Coupe (C205) C 200 |
|---|---|---|
| Consumption | 7.6 L/100 km30.9 mpg US37.2 mpg UK | 7.1 L/100 km33.1 mpg US39.8 mpg UK |
| Cost / 100 km | 13.30 LC100 km | 12.42 LC100 km |
| Cost / 100 mi | 21.40 LC100 mi | 20.00 LC100 mi |
| Annual fuel used | 1,140 L301 US gal251 UK gal | 1,065 L281 US gal234 UK gal |
| Annual fuel cost | 1,995 LC/year | 1,864 LC/year |
Head-to-head comparisons
Mercedes-Benz C-class All-Terrain C 200
- Has 20 hp more
- Has 2 km/h (1 mph) higher top speed
- Has 90 L more trunk volume
Pros
- Quickest 0-100 km/h in this comparison
- Highest top speed
- Most powerful
- Highest torque
- Largest trunk
Cons
- Highest combined fuel consumption
- Heaviest
Mercedes-Benz C-class Coupe (C205) C 200
- Is 200 kg lighter
- Uses 0.5 L/100 km less fuel
- Has 2 hp/t better power-to-weight
- Has 46 km (29 mi) more estimated range
Pros
- Lightest
- Lowest combined fuel consumption
- Best power-to-weight ratio
- Best estimated range
Cons
- Lowest power
- Lowest top speed
- Smallest trunk
Choose cars to compare
Popular comparisons























