Mercedes-Benz CLK (A209)
Car comparison
Mercedes-Benz CLK (A209) CLK 500vsMorgan Aero 8 4.4 i V8 32V
Compare specs, acceleration, fuel consumption, dimensions, practicality, and estimated running costs side by side.
New comparisonMorgan Aero 8
4.4 i V8 32V
Comparison overview
Use the estimates as comparison hints and verify exact figures before making decisions.
Best choices
Mercedes-Benz CLK (A209) CLK 500
- Fastest top speed260 km/h162 mph Unrestricted250 km/h155 mph Restricted
- Most powerful306 hp228 kW
- Highest torque460 Nm339 lb-ft
- Lowest combined fuel consumption11.6 L/100 km20.3 mpg US24.4 mpg UK
- Lowest city consumption17.2 L/100 km13.7 mpg US16.4 mpg UK
- Lowest highway consumption8.6 L/100 km27.4 mpg US32.8 mpg UK
- Best overall score58/100
- Best economy score76/100
- Best practicality score44/100
Morgan Aero 8 4.4 i V8 32V
- Quickest 0-100 km/h5.0 s
- Lightest1,000 kg2,205 lb
- Best power-to-weight286 hp/t213 kW/t3.5 kg/hp
- Best estimated range565 km351 mi
- Best performance score69/100
Specification comparison
| Model | Mercedes-BenzCLK (A209)CLK 500 | MorganAero 84.4 i V8 32V |
|---|---|---|
| Power | 306hp228kW | 286hp213kW |
| Torque | 460Nm339lb-ft | 430Nm317lb-ft |
| Curb weight | 1,710kg3,770lb | 1,000kg2,205lb |
| Gross weight | 2,225kg4,905lb | 1,300kg2,866lb |
| Top speed | Unrestricted 260 km/h162 mph Restricted 250 km/h155 mph Calculated | 257 km/h 160 mph |
| To 99% top speed | 85.2s99% target: 257 km/h / 160 mph Calculated | 52.6s99% target: 254 km/h / 158 mph Calculated |
| 0-100 km/h | 6.2s | 5.0s |
| 0-200 km/h | 22.5s Calculated | 16.2s Calculated |
| 0-60 mph | 5.9s Calculated | 4.8s Calculated |
| Fuel consumption | 11.6L/100 km20.3mpg US24.4mpg UK | 12.4L/100 km19mpg US22.8mpg UK |
| Fuel consumption city | 17.2L/100 km13.7mpg US16.4mpg UK | 18.4L/100 km12.8mpg US15.4mpg UK |
| Fuel consumption highway | 8.6L/100 km27.4mpg US32.8mpg UK | 8.9L/100 km26.4mpg US31.7mpg UK |
| Quarter mile | 14.3s Calculated | 13.0s Calculated |
| Power-to-weight | 179hp/t133kW/t81hp/1000 lb Calculated | 286hp/t213kW/t130hp/1000 lb Calculated |
| Torque-to-weight | 269Nm/t180lb-ft/ton Calculated | 430Nm/t288lb-ft/ton Calculated |
| Estimated range | 534km332mi Calculated | 565km351mi Calculated |
| Displacement | 4,966cc303cu in | 4,398cc268cu in |
| Length | 4,638mm183in | 4,120mm162in |
| Width | 1,740mm69in | 1,770mm70in |
| Height | 1,413mm56in | 1,200mm47in |
| Wheelbase | 2,715mm107in | 2,525mm99in |
| Front track | 1,497mm59in | 1,550mm61in |
| Rear track | 1,478mm58in | 1,500mm59in |
| Trunk volume | 276L | - |
| Max trunk volume | 390L | - |
| Doors | 2 | 2 |
| Seats | 4 | 2 |
| Fuel tank | 62L | 70L |
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 (A209) CLK 500: Power / Torque
- Morgan Aero 8 4.4 i V8 32V: Power / Torque
| Vehicle | Peak power RPM | Peak torque RPM | Max engine speed |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mercedes-BenzCLK (A209)CLK 500 | 5,600 rpm | 2,700-4,250 rpm | 6,000 rpm |
| MorganAero 84.4 i V8 32V | 5,500 rpm | 3,700 rpm | 5,750 rpm |
Acceleration curve
Estimated speed over time for selected vehicles.
| Metric | Mercedes-BenzCLK (A209)CLK 500 | MorganAero 84.4 i V8 32V |
|---|---|---|
| Acceleration checkpoints | ||
0-60 mph 0-97 km/h | 5.9 s | 4.8 s |
0-100 km/h 0-62 mph | 6.2 s | 5.0 s |
0-200 km/h 0-124 mph | 22.5 s | 16.2 s |
| Top speed | Unrestricted 260 km/h162 mph Restricted 250 km/h155 mph Limited | 257 km/h 160 mph |
| Drag race simulation | ||
60 ft 18 m | 2.4 s | 2.3 s |
330 ft 101 m | 6.2 s | 5.8 s |
1/8 mile 201 m | 9.4 s | 8.6 s |
1000 ft 305 m | 12.0 s | 11.0 s |
1/4 mile 402 m | 14.3 s | 13.0 s |
Trap speed 1/4 mile 402 m | 164 km/h 102 mph | 181 km/h 113 mph |
Power comparison
Bar comparison chart for Power. Higher is better · hp / kW
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| Mercedes-BenzCLK (A209)CLK 500 | 306 hp 228 kW |
| MorganAero 84.4 i V8 32V | 286 hp 213 kW |
Mercedes-Benz CLK (A209) CLK 500 has 20 hp more than Morgan Aero 8 4.4 i V8 32V.
The biggest power difference is between Morgan Aero 8 4.4 i V8 32V and Mercedes-Benz CLK (A209) CLK 500: 20 hp (15 kW).
Torque comparison
Bar comparison chart for Torque. Higher is better · Nm / lb-ft
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| Mercedes-BenzCLK (A209)CLK 500 | 460 Nm 339 lb-ft |
| MorganAero 84.4 i V8 32V | 430 Nm 317 lb-ft |
Curb weight comparison
Bar comparison chart for Curb weight. Lower is better · kg / lb
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| Mercedes-BenzCLK (A209)CLK 500 | 1,710 kg 3,770 lb |
| MorganAero 84.4 i V8 32V | 1,000 kg 2,205 lb |
Top speed without limiter comparison
Bar comparison chart for Top speed without limiter. Higher is better · km/h / mph
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| Mercedes-BenzCLK (A209)CLK 500 | Unrestricted 260 km/h162 mph Restricted 250 km/h155 mph |
| MorganAero 84.4 i V8 32V | 257 km/h 160 mph |
0-100 km/h comparison
Bar comparison chart for 0-100 km/h. Lower is better · seconds
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| Mercedes-BenzCLK (A209)CLK 500 | 6.2 s |
| MorganAero 84.4 i V8 32V | 5.0 s |
Although Mercedes-Benz CLK (A209) CLK 500 has more power, Morgan Aero 8 4.4 i V8 32V is quicker from 0-100 km/h.
The biggest 0-100 km/h difference is between Morgan Aero 8 4.4 i V8 32V and Mercedes-Benz CLK (A209) CLK 500: 1.2 s.
Fuel consumption comparison
Bar comparison chart for Fuel consumption. Lower is better · L/100 km / mpg US / mpg UK
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| Mercedes-BenzCLK (A209)CLK 500 | 11.6 L/100 km 20.3 mpg US 24.4 mpg UK |
| MorganAero 84.4 i V8 32V | 12.4 L/100 km 19.0 mpg US 22.8 mpg UK |
The biggest fuel consumption difference is between Mercedes-Benz CLK (A209) CLK 500 and Morgan Aero 8 4.4 i V8 32V: 0.8 L/100 km.
Power-to-weight comparison
Bar comparison chart for Power-to-weight. Higher is better · hp/t / kW/t
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| Mercedes-BenzCLK (A209)CLK 500 | 179 hp/t 133 kW/t 5.6 kg/hp |
| MorganAero 84.4 i V8 32V | 286 hp/t 213 kW/t 3.5 kg/hp |
Estimated range comparison
Bar comparison chart for Estimated range. Higher is better · km / mi
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| Mercedes-BenzCLK (A209)CLK 500 | 534 km 332 mi |
| MorganAero 84.4 i V8 32V | 565 km 351 mi |
Performance spider chart
Radar chart comparing normalized performance and fuel-consumption scores.
| Vehicle | Power | Acceleration | Top speed |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mercedes-BenzCLK (A209)CLK 500 | 306 hp 228 kW | 6.2 s | Unrestricted 260 km/h162 mph Restricted 250 km/h155 mph |
| MorganAero 84.4 i V8 32V | 286 hp 213 kW | 5.0 s | 257 km/h 160 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 (A209)CLK 500 |
|
| ||||||||||||||
| MorganAero 84.4 i V8 32V |
|
| ||||||||||||||
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-BenzCLK (A209)CLK 500 |
| 11.6 L/100 km 20.3 mpg US 24.4 mpg UK | ||||||
| MorganAero 84.4 i V8 32V |
| 12.4 L/100 km 19.0 mpg US 22.8 mpg UK | ||||||
Morgan Aero 8 4.4 i V8 32V 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-BenzCLK (A209)CLK 500 | 11.6 L/100 km 20.3 mpg US 24.4 mpg UK | 6.2 s |
| MorganAero 84.4 i V8 32V | 12.4 L/100 km 19.0 mpg US 22.8 mpg UK | 5.0 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 |
|---|---|---|
| Mercedes-BenzCLK (A209)CLK 500 | 179 hp/t 133 kW/t 5.6 kg/hp | 11.6 L/100 km 20.3 mpg US 24.4 mpg UK |
| MorganAero 84.4 i V8 32V | 286 hp/t 213 kW/t 3.5 kg/hp | 12.4 L/100 km 19.0 mpg US 22.8 mpg UK |
Detailed score breakdown
| Vehicle | Mercedes-BenzCLK (A209)CLK 500 | MorganAero 84.4 i V8 32V | ||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power | 306 hp 228 kW | 286 hp 213 kW | ||||||||||||||||
| Torque | 460 Nm 339 lb-ft | 430 Nm 317 lb-ft | ||||||||||||||||
| Acceleration | 6.2 s | 5.0 s | ||||||||||||||||
| Top speed | Unrestricted 260 km/h162 mph Restricted 250 km/h155 mph | 257 km/h 160 mph | ||||||||||||||||
| Lightness | 1,710 kg 3,770 lb | 1,000 kg 2,205 lb | ||||||||||||||||
| Fuel consumption | 11.6 L/100 km 20.3 mpg US 24.4 mpg UK | 12.4 L/100 km 19.0 mpg US 22.8 mpg UK | ||||||||||||||||
| Practicality |
|
| ||||||||||||||||
| Range score | 534 km 332 mi | 565 km 351 mi | ||||||||||||||||
| Trunk score | 276 L 9.7 cu ft | - | ||||||||||||||||
| Power-to-weight score | 179 hp/t 133 kW/t 5.6 kg/hp | 286 hp/t 213 kW/t 3.5 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 (A209) CLK 500 | Morgan Aero 8 4.4 i V8 32V |
|---|---|---|
| Consumption | 11.6 L/100 km20.3 mpg US24.4 mpg UK | 12.4 L/100 km19 mpg US22.8 mpg UK |
| Cost / 100 km | 20.30 LC100 km | 21.70 LC100 km |
| Cost / 100 mi | 32.67 LC100 mi | 34.92 LC100 mi |
| Annual fuel used | 1,740 L460 US gal383 UK gal | 1,860 L491 US gal409 UK gal |
| Annual fuel cost | 3,045 LC/year | 3,255 LC/year |
Head-to-head comparisons
Mercedes-Benz CLK (A209) CLK 500
- Has 20 hp more
- Has 30 Nm more
- Has 3 km/h (2 mph) higher top speed
- Uses 0.8 L/100 km less fuel
Pros
- Highest top speed
- Most powerful
- Highest torque
- Lowest combined fuel consumption
Cons
- Slowest 0-100 km/h
- Heaviest
Morgan Aero 8 4.4 i V8 32V
- Is 710 kg lighter
- Is 1.2 s quicker from 0-100 km/h
- Has 107 hp/t better power-to-weight
- Has 30 km (19 mi) more estimated range
Pros
- Quickest 0-100 km/h in this comparison
- Lightest
- Best power-to-weight ratio
- Best estimated range
Cons
- Lowest power
- Highest combined fuel consumption
- Lowest top speed
Choose cars to compare
Popular comparisons























