Mercedes-Benz CLK (A208) · Facelift 1999
Car comparison
Mercedes-Benz CLK (A208) · Facelift 1999 AMG CLK 55 V8vsTVR Chimaera 4.3
Compare specs, acceleration, fuel consumption, dimensions, practicality, and estimated running costs side by side.
New comparisonTVR Chimaera
4.3
Comparison overview
Use the estimates as comparison hints and verify exact figures before making decisions.
Best choices
Mercedes-Benz CLK (A208) Facelift 1999 AMG CLK 55 V8
- Fastest top speed260 km/h162 mph Unrestricted250 km/h155 mph Restricted
- Most powerful347 hp259 kW
- Highest torque510 Nm376 lb-ft
- Lowest city consumption17.1 L/100 km13.8 mpg US16.5 mpg UK
- Lowest highway consumption8.5 L/100 km27.7 mpg US33.2 mpg UK
- Best overall score62/100
- Best economy score75/100
- Best practicality score48/100
TVR Chimaera 4.3
- Quickest 0-100 km/h4.4 s
- Lightest1,060 kg2,337 lb
- Best power-to-weight264 hp/t197 kW/t3.8 kg/hp
- Best performance score69/100
Specification comparison
| Model | Mercedes-BenzCLK (A208)Facelift 1999AMG CLK 55 V8 | TVRChimaera4.3 |
|---|---|---|
| Power | 347hp259kW | 280hp209kW |
| Torque | 510Nm376lb-ft | 398Nm294lb-ft |
| Curb weight | 1,680kg3,704lb | 1,060kg2,337lb |
| Gross weight | 2,080kg4,586lb | 1,300kg2,866lb |
| Top speed | Unrestricted 260 km/h162 mph Restricted 250 km/h155 mph Calculated | 253 km/h 157 mph |
| To 99% top speed | 80.2s99% target: 257 km/h / 160 mph Calculated | 47.2s99% target: 250 km/h / 156 mph Calculated |
| 0-100 km/h | 6.2s | 4.4s |
| 0-200 km/h | 21.8s Calculated | 14.8s Calculated |
| 0-60 mph | 5.9s Calculated | 4.2s Calculated |
| Fuel consumption | 11.7L/100 km20.1mpg US24.1mpg UK | - |
| Fuel consumption city | 17.1L/100 km13.8mpg US16.5mpg UK | 18L/100 km13.1mpg US15.7mpg UK |
| Fuel consumption highway | 8.5L/100 km27.7mpg US33.2mpg UK | 10L/100 km23.5mpg US28.2mpg UK |
| Quarter mile | 14.2s Calculated | 12.4s Calculated |
| Power-to-weight | 207hp/t154kW/t94hp/1000 lb Calculated | 264hp/t197kW/t120hp/1000 lb Calculated |
| Torque-to-weight | 304Nm/t203lb-ft/ton Calculated | 375Nm/t251lb-ft/ton Calculated |
| Estimated range | 530km329mi Calculated | - |
| Displacement | 5,439cc332cu in | 4,275cc261cu in |
| Length | 4,567mm180in | 3,965mm156in |
| Width | 1,722mm68in | 1,730mm68in |
| Height | 1,380mm54in | 1,223mm48in |
| Wheelbase | 2,690mm106in | 2,282mm90in |
| Front track | 1,505mm59in | 1,460mm57in |
| Rear track | 1,488mm59in | 1,470mm58in |
| Trunk volume | - | 310L |
| Doors | 2 | 2 |
| Seats | 4 | 2 |
| Fuel tank | 62L | 57L |
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 (A208) Facelift 1999 AMG CLK 55 V8: Power / Torque
- TVR Chimaera 4.3: Power / Torque
| Vehicle | Peak power RPM | Peak torque RPM | Max engine speed |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mercedes-BenzCLK (A208)Facelift 1999AMG CLK 55 V8 | 5,500 rpm | 3,000-4,300 rpm | 5,750 rpm |
| TVRChimaera4.3 | 5,500 rpm | 4,000 rpm | 5,750 rpm |
Acceleration curve
Estimated speed over time for selected vehicles.
| Metric | Mercedes-BenzCLK (A208)Facelift 1999AMG CLK 55 V8 | TVRChimaera4.3 |
|---|---|---|
| Acceleration checkpoints | ||
0-60 mph 0-97 km/h | 5.9 s | 4.2 s |
0-100 km/h 0-62 mph | 6.2 s | 4.4 s |
0-200 km/h 0-124 mph | 21.8 s | 14.8 s |
| Top speed | Unrestricted 260 km/h162 mph Restricted 250 km/h155 mph Limited | 253 km/h 157 mph |
| Drag race simulation | ||
60 ft 18 m | 2.4 s | 2.1 s |
330 ft 101 m | 6.3 s | 5.5 s |
1/8 mile 201 m | 9.4 s | 8.2 s |
1000 ft 305 m | 12.0 s | 10.5 s |
1/4 mile 402 m | 14.2 s | 12.4 s |
Trap speed 1/4 mile 402 m | 165 km/h 103 mph | 186 km/h 116 mph |
Power comparison
Bar comparison chart for Power. Higher is better · hp / kW
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| Mercedes-BenzCLK (A208)Facelift 1999AMG CLK 55 V8 | 347 hp 259 kW |
| TVRChimaera4.3 | 280 hp 209 kW |
Mercedes-Benz CLK (A208) Facelift 1999 AMG CLK 55 V8 has 67 hp more than TVR Chimaera 4.3.
The biggest power difference is between TVR Chimaera 4.3 and Mercedes-Benz CLK (A208) Facelift 1999 AMG CLK 55 V8: 67 hp (50 kW).
Torque comparison
Bar comparison chart for Torque. Higher is better · Nm / lb-ft
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| Mercedes-BenzCLK (A208)Facelift 1999AMG CLK 55 V8 | 510 Nm 376 lb-ft |
| TVRChimaera4.3 | 398 Nm 294 lb-ft |
Curb weight comparison
Bar comparison chart for Curb weight. Lower is better · kg / lb
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| Mercedes-BenzCLK (A208)Facelift 1999AMG CLK 55 V8 | 1,680 kg 3,704 lb |
| TVRChimaera4.3 | 1,060 kg 2,337 lb |
Top speed without limiter comparison
Bar comparison chart for Top speed without limiter. Higher is better · km/h / mph
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| Mercedes-BenzCLK (A208)Facelift 1999AMG CLK 55 V8 | Unrestricted 260 km/h162 mph Restricted 250 km/h155 mph |
| TVRChimaera4.3 | 253 km/h 157 mph |
0-100 km/h comparison
Bar comparison chart for 0-100 km/h. Lower is better · seconds
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| Mercedes-BenzCLK (A208)Facelift 1999AMG CLK 55 V8 | 6.2 s |
| TVRChimaera4.3 | 4.4 s |
Although Mercedes-Benz CLK (A208) Facelift 1999 AMG CLK 55 V8 has more power, TVR Chimaera 4.3 is quicker from 0-100 km/h.
The biggest 0-100 km/h difference is between TVR Chimaera 4.3 and Mercedes-Benz CLK (A208) Facelift 1999 AMG CLK 55 V8: 1.8 s.
Power-to-weight comparison
Bar comparison chart for Power-to-weight. Higher is better · hp/t / kW/t
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| Mercedes-BenzCLK (A208)Facelift 1999AMG CLK 55 V8 | 207 hp/t 154 kW/t 4.8 kg/hp |
| TVRChimaera4.3 | 264 hp/t 197 kW/t 3.8 kg/hp |
Performance spider chart
Radar chart comparing normalized performance and fuel-consumption scores.
| Vehicle | Power | Acceleration | Top speed |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mercedes-BenzCLK (A208)Facelift 1999AMG CLK 55 V8 | 347 hp 259 kW | 6.2 s | Unrestricted 260 km/h162 mph Restricted 250 km/h155 mph |
| TVRChimaera4.3 | 280 hp 209 kW | 4.4 s | 253 km/h 157 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 (A208)Facelift 1999AMG CLK 55 V8 |
|
| ||||||||||||||
| TVRChimaera4.3 |
|
| ||||||||||||||
Detailed score breakdown
| Vehicle | Mercedes-BenzCLK (A208)Facelift 1999AMG CLK 55 V8 | TVRChimaera4.3 | ||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power | 347 hp 259 kW | 280 hp 209 kW | ||||||||||||||||
| Torque | 510 Nm 376 lb-ft | 398 Nm 294 lb-ft | ||||||||||||||||
| Acceleration | 6.2 s | 4.4 s | ||||||||||||||||
| Top speed | Unrestricted 260 km/h162 mph Restricted 250 km/h155 mph | 253 km/h 157 mph | ||||||||||||||||
| Lightness | 1,680 kg 3,704 lb | 1,060 kg 2,337 lb | ||||||||||||||||
| Fuel consumption | 11.7 L/100 km 20.1 mpg US 24.1 mpg UK | - | ||||||||||||||||
| Practicality |
|
| ||||||||||||||||
| Range score | 530 km 329 mi | - | ||||||||||||||||
| Trunk score | - | 310 L 10.9 cu ft | ||||||||||||||||
| Power-to-weight score | 207 hp/t 154 kW/t 4.8 kg/hp | 264 hp/t 197 kW/t 3.8 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 CLK (A208) Facelift 1999 AMG CLK 55 V8 |
|---|---|
| Consumption | 11.7 L/100 km20.1 mpg US24.1 mpg UK |
| Cost / 100 km | 20.47 LC100 km |
| Cost / 100 mi | 32.95 LC100 mi |
| Annual fuel used | 1,755 L464 US gal386 UK gal |
| Annual fuel cost | 3,071 LC/year |
Head-to-head comparisons
Mercedes-Benz CLK (A208) Facelift 1999 AMG CLK 55 V8
- Has 67 hp more
- Has 112 Nm more
- Has 7 km/h (4 mph) higher top speed
Pros
- Highest top speed
- Most powerful
- Highest torque
Cons
- Slowest 0-100 km/h
- Heaviest
TVR Chimaera 4.3
- Is 620 kg lighter
- Is 1.8 s quicker from 0-100 km/h
- Has 58 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























