Mercedes-Benz C-class All-Terrain
Car comparison
Mercedes-Benz C-class All-Terrain C 220dvsSkoda Octavia IV Combi 2.0 TSI
Compare specs, acceleration, fuel consumption, dimensions, practicality, and estimated running costs side by side.
New comparisonSkoda Octavia IV Combi
2.0 TSI
Comparison overview
Use the estimates as comparison hints and verify exact figures before making decisions.
Best choices
Skoda Octavia IV Combi 2.0 TSI
- Quickest 0-100 km/h6.9 s
- Lightest1,671 kg3,684 lb
- Best power-to-weight114 hp/t85 kW/t8.8 kg/hp
- Best estimated range743 km462 mi
- Largest trunk640 L
- Best overall score64/100
- Best practicality score89/100
Mercedes-Benz C-class All-Terrain C 220d
- Fastest top speed231 km/h144 mph
- Most powerful200 hp149 kW
- Highest torque440 Nm325 lb-ft
- Lowest combined fuel consumption5.6 L/100 km42.0 mpg US50.4 mpg UK
- Best performance score52/100
- Best economy score92/100
Specification comparison
| Model | Mercedes-BenzC-class All-TerrainC 220d | SkodaOctavia IV Combi2.0 TSI |
|---|---|---|
| Power | 200hp149kW | 190hp142kW |
| Torque | 440Nm325lb-ft | 320Nm236lb-ft |
| Curb weight | 1,800kg3,968lb | 1,671kg3,684lb |
| Gross weight | 2,400kg5,291lb | 2,190kg4,828lb |
| Top speed | 231 km/h 144 mph | 229 km/h 142 mph |
| To 99% top speed | 78.8s99% target: 229 km/h / 142 mph Calculated | 64.9s99% target: 227 km/h / 141 mph Calculated |
| 0-100 km/h | 7.8s | 6.9s |
| 0-200 km/h | 31.5s Calculated | 27.4s Calculated |
| 0-60 mph | 7.4s Calculated | 6.6s Calculated |
| Fuel consumption | 5.6L/100 km42mpg US50.4mpg UK | 7.4L/100 km31.8mpg US38.2mpg UK |
| Quarter mile | 15.6s Calculated | 14.9s Calculated |
| Power-to-weight | 111hp/t83kW/t50hp/1000 lb Calculated | 114hp/t85kW/t52hp/1000 lb Calculated |
| Torque-to-weight | 244Nm/t164lb-ft/ton Calculated | 192Nm/t128lb-ft/ton Calculated |
| Estimated range | 714km444mi Calculated | 743km462mi Calculated |
| Displacement | 1,993cc122cu in | 1,984cc121cu in |
| Length | 4,755mm187in | 4,689mm185in |
| Width | 1,841mm72in | 1,829mm72in |
| Height | 1,494mm59in | 1,468mm58in |
| Wheelbase | 2,865mm113in | 2,680mm106in |
| Front track | 1,584mm62in | 1,543mm61in |
| Rear track | 1,582mm62in | 1,535mm60in |
| Ground clearance | - | 141mm6in |
| Trunk volume | 490L | 640L |
| Max trunk volume | 1,510L | 1,700L |
| Doors | 5 | 5 |
| Seats | 5 | 5 |
| Fuel tank | 40L | 55L |
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 220d: Power / Torque
- Skoda Octavia IV Combi 2.0 TSI: Power / Torque
| Vehicle | Peak power RPM | Peak torque RPM | Max engine speed |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mercedes-BenzC-class All-TerrainC 220d | 4,200 rpm | 1,800-2,800 rpm | 4,450 rpm |
| SkodaOctavia IV Combi2.0 TSI | 4,200-6,000 rpm | 1,500-4,100 rpm | 6,250 rpm |
Acceleration curve
Estimated speed over time for selected vehicles.
| Metric | Mercedes-BenzC-class All-TerrainC 220d | SkodaOctavia IV Combi2.0 TSI |
|---|---|---|
| Acceleration checkpoints | ||
0-60 mph 0-97 km/h | 7.4 s | 6.6 s |
0-100 km/h 0-62 mph | 7.8 s | 6.9 s |
0-200 km/h 0-124 mph | 31.5 s | 27.4 s |
| Top speed | 231 km/h 144 mph | 229 km/h 142 mph |
| Drag race simulation | ||
60 ft 18 m | 2.7 s | 2.6 s |
330 ft 101 m | 6.9 s | 6.6 s |
1/8 mile 201 m | 10.3 s | 9.8 s |
1000 ft 305 m | 13.2 s | 12.6 s |
1/4 mile 402 m | 15.6 s | 14.9 s |
Trap speed 1/4 mile 402 m | 151 km/h 94 mph | 158 km/h 98 mph |
Power comparison
Bar comparison chart for Power. Higher is better · hp / kW
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| Mercedes-BenzC-class All-TerrainC 220d | 200 hp 149 kW |
| SkodaOctavia IV Combi2.0 TSI | 190 hp 142 kW |
Mercedes-Benz C-class All-Terrain C 220d has 10 hp more than Skoda Octavia IV Combi 2.0 TSI.
The biggest power difference is between Skoda Octavia IV Combi 2.0 TSI and Mercedes-Benz C-class All-Terrain C 220d: 10 hp (7 kW).
Torque comparison
Bar comparison chart for Torque. Higher is better · Nm / lb-ft
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| Mercedes-BenzC-class All-TerrainC 220d | 440 Nm 325 lb-ft |
| SkodaOctavia IV Combi2.0 TSI | 320 Nm 236 lb-ft |
Curb weight comparison
Bar comparison chart for Curb weight. Lower is better · kg / lb
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| Mercedes-BenzC-class All-TerrainC 220d | 1,800 kg 3,968 lb |
| SkodaOctavia IV Combi2.0 TSI | 1,671 kg 3,684 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 220d | 231 km/h 144 mph |
| SkodaOctavia IV Combi2.0 TSI | 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 220d | 7.8 s |
| SkodaOctavia IV Combi2.0 TSI | 6.9 s |
Although Mercedes-Benz C-class All-Terrain C 220d has more power, Skoda Octavia IV Combi 2.0 TSI is quicker from 0-100 km/h.
The biggest 0-100 km/h difference is between Skoda Octavia IV Combi 2.0 TSI and Mercedes-Benz C-class All-Terrain C 220d: 0.9 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 220d | 5.6 L/100 km 42.0 mpg US 50.4 mpg UK |
| SkodaOctavia IV Combi2.0 TSI | 7.4 L/100 km 31.8 mpg US 38.2 mpg UK |
The biggest fuel consumption difference is between Mercedes-Benz C-class All-Terrain C 220d and Skoda Octavia IV Combi 2.0 TSI: 1.8 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 220d | 111 hp/t 83 kW/t 9.0 kg/hp |
| SkodaOctavia IV Combi2.0 TSI | 114 hp/t 85 kW/t 8.8 kg/hp |
Estimated range comparison
Bar comparison chart for Estimated range. Higher is better · km / mi
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| Mercedes-BenzC-class All-TerrainC 220d | 714 km 444 mi |
| SkodaOctavia IV Combi2.0 TSI | 743 km 462 mi |
Performance spider chart
Radar chart comparing normalized performance and fuel-consumption scores.
| Vehicle | Power | Acceleration | Top speed |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mercedes-BenzC-class All-TerrainC 220d | 200 hp 149 kW | 7.8 s | 231 km/h 144 mph |
| SkodaOctavia IV Combi2.0 TSI | 190 hp 142 kW | 6.9 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 220d |
|
| ||||||||||||||
| SkodaOctavia IV Combi2.0 TSI |
|
| ||||||||||||||
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 220d |
| 5.6 L/100 km 42.0 mpg US 50.4 mpg UK | ||||||
| SkodaOctavia IV Combi2.0 TSI |
| 7.4 L/100 km 31.8 mpg US 38.2 mpg UK | ||||||
Mercedes-Benz C-class All-Terrain C 220d 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 220d | 5.6 L/100 km 42.0 mpg US 50.4 mpg UK | 7.8 s |
| SkodaOctavia IV Combi2.0 TSI | 7.4 L/100 km 31.8 mpg US 38.2 mpg UK | 6.9 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 220d | 111 hp/t 83 kW/t 9.0 kg/hp | 5.6 L/100 km 42.0 mpg US 50.4 mpg UK |
| SkodaOctavia IV Combi2.0 TSI | 114 hp/t 85 kW/t 8.8 kg/hp | 7.4 L/100 km 31.8 mpg US 38.2 mpg UK |
Detailed score breakdown
| Vehicle | Mercedes-BenzC-class All-TerrainC 220d | SkodaOctavia IV Combi2.0 TSI | ||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power | 200 hp 149 kW | 190 hp 142 kW | ||||||||||||||||
| Torque | 440 Nm 325 lb-ft | 320 Nm 236 lb-ft | ||||||||||||||||
| Acceleration | 7.8 s | 6.9 s | ||||||||||||||||
| Top speed | 231 km/h 144 mph | 229 km/h 142 mph | ||||||||||||||||
| Lightness | 1,800 kg 3,968 lb | 1,671 kg 3,684 lb | ||||||||||||||||
| Fuel consumption | 5.6 L/100 km 42.0 mpg US 50.4 mpg UK | 7.4 L/100 km 31.8 mpg US 38.2 mpg UK | ||||||||||||||||
| Practicality |
|
| ||||||||||||||||
| Range score | 714 km 444 mi | 743 km 462 mi | ||||||||||||||||
| Trunk score | 490 L 17.3 cu ft | 640 L 22.6 cu ft | ||||||||||||||||
| Power-to-weight score | 111 hp/t 83 kW/t 9.0 kg/hp | 114 hp/t 85 kW/t 8.8 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 220d | Skoda Octavia IV Combi 2.0 TSI |
|---|---|---|
| Consumption | 5.6 L/100 km42 mpg US50.4 mpg UK | 7.4 L/100 km31.8 mpg US38.2 mpg UK |
| Cost / 100 km | 9.80 LC100 km | 12.95 LC100 km |
| Cost / 100 mi | 15.77 LC100 mi | 20.84 LC100 mi |
| Annual fuel used | 840 L222 US gal185 UK gal | 1,110 L293 US gal244 UK gal |
| Annual fuel cost | 1,470 LC/year | 1,943 LC/year |
Head-to-head comparisons
Mercedes-Benz C-class All-Terrain C 220d
- Has 10 hp more
- Has 120 Nm more
- Has 2 km/h (1 mph) higher top speed
- Uses 1.8 L/100 km less fuel
Pros
- Highest top speed
- Most powerful
- Highest torque
- Lowest combined fuel consumption
Cons
- Slowest 0-100 km/h
- Heaviest
- Smallest trunk
Skoda Octavia IV Combi 2.0 TSI
- Is 129 kg lighter
- Is 0.9 s quicker from 0-100 km/h
- Has 3 hp/t better power-to-weight
- Has 29 km (18 mi) more estimated range
- Has 150 L more trunk volume
Pros
- Quickest 0-100 km/h in this comparison
- Lightest
- Best power-to-weight ratio
- Best estimated range
- Largest trunk
Cons
- Lowest power
- Highest combined fuel consumption
- Lowest top speed
Choose cars to compare
Popular comparisons























