Mercedes-Benz CLK (C208) · Facelift 1999
Car comparison
Mercedes-Benz CLK (C208) · Facelift 1999 AMG CLK 55 V8vsMG Xpower SV 4.6 i V8 32V
Compare specs, acceleration, fuel consumption, dimensions, practicality, and estimated running costs side by side.
New comparisonMG Xpower SV
4.6 i V8 32V
Comparison overview
Use the estimates as comparison hints and verify exact figures before making decisions.
Best choices
Mercedes-Benz CLK (C208) Facelift 1999 AMG CLK 55 V8
- Quickest 0-100 km/h5.4 s
- Fastest top speed265 km/h165 mph Unrestricted250 km/h155 mph Restricted
- Most powerful347 hp259 kW
- Highest torque510 Nm376 lb-ft
- Best power-to-weight225 hp/t167 kW/t4.5 kg/hp
- Lowest highway consumption8.5 L/100 km27.7 mpg US33.2 mpg UK
- Largest trunk420 L
- Best overall score65/100
- Best performance score71/100
- Best economy score75/100
- Best practicality score52/100
MG Xpower SV 4.6 i V8 32V
- Lightest1,540 kg3,395 lb
- Lowest city consumption16.0 L/100 km14.7 mpg US17.7 mpg UK
Specification comparison
| Model | Mercedes-BenzCLK (C208)Facelift 1999AMG CLK 55 V8 | MGXpower SV4.6 i V8 32V |
|---|---|---|
| Power | 347hp259kW | 320hp239kW |
| Torque | 510Nm376lb-ft | 410Nm302lb-ft |
| Curb weight | 1,545kg3,406lb | 1,540kg3,395lb |
| Gross weight | 1,960kg4,321lb | - |
| Top speed | Unrestricted 265 km/h165 mph Restricted 250 km/h155 mph Calculated | 254 km/h 158 mph |
| To 99% top speed | 69.6s99% target: 262 km/h / 163 mph Calculated | 69.3s99% target: 251 km/h / 156 mph Calculated |
| 0-100 km/h | 5.4s | 5.4s |
| 0-200 km/h | 18.3s Calculated | 19.8s Calculated |
| 0-60 mph | 5.1s Calculated | 5.1s Calculated |
| Fuel consumption | 11.7L/100 km20.1mpg US24.1mpg UK | - |
| Fuel consumption city | 17.1L/100 km13.8mpg US16.5mpg UK | 16L/100 km14.7mpg US17.7mpg UK |
| Fuel consumption highway | 8.5L/100 km27.7mpg US33.2mpg UK | 11L/100 km21.4mpg US25.7mpg UK |
| Quarter mile | 13.5s Calculated | 13.5s Calculated |
| Power-to-weight | 225hp/t167kW/t102hp/1000 lb Calculated | 208hp/t155kW/t94hp/1000 lb Calculated |
| Torque-to-weight | 330Nm/t221lb-ft/ton Calculated | 266Nm/t178lb-ft/ton Calculated |
| Estimated range | 530km329mi Calculated | - |
| Displacement | 5,439cc332cu in | 4,600cc281cu in |
| Length | 4,567mm180in | 4,480mm176in |
| Width | 1,722mm68in | 1,900mm75in |
| Height | 1,371mm54in | 1,320mm52in |
| Wheelbase | 2,690mm106in | 2,670mm105in |
| Front track | 1,505mm59in | 1,678mm66in |
| Rear track | 1,488mm59in | 1,626mm64in |
| Trunk volume | 420L | 250L |
| Doors | 2 | 2 |
| Seats | 4 | 2 |
| Fuel tank | 62L | 80L |
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 (C208) Facelift 1999 AMG CLK 55 V8: Power / Torque
- MG Xpower SV 4.6 i V8 32V: Power / Torque
| Vehicle | Peak power RPM | Peak torque RPM | Max engine speed |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mercedes-BenzCLK (C208)Facelift 1999AMG CLK 55 V8 | 5,500 rpm | 3,000-4,300 rpm | 5,750 rpm |
| MGXpower SV4.6 i V8 32V | 6,000 rpm | 4,750 rpm | 6,250 rpm |
Acceleration curve
Estimated speed over time for selected vehicles.
| Metric | Mercedes-BenzCLK (C208)Facelift 1999AMG CLK 55 V8 | MGXpower SV4.6 i V8 32V |
|---|---|---|
| Acceleration checkpoints | ||
0-60 mph 0-97 km/h | 5.1 s | 5.1 s |
0-100 km/h 0-62 mph | 5.4 s | 5.4 s |
0-200 km/h 0-124 mph | 18.3 s | 19.8 s |
| Top speed | Unrestricted 265 km/h165 mph Restricted 250 km/h155 mph Limited | 254 km/h 158 mph |
| Drag race simulation | ||
60 ft 18 m | 2.3 s | 2.2 s |
330 ft 101 m | 5.9 s | 5.9 s |
1/8 mile 201 m | 8.9 s | 8.9 s |
1000 ft 305 m | 11.4 s | 11.4 s |
1/4 mile 402 m | 13.5 s | 13.5 s |
Trap speed 1/4 mile 402 m | 174 km/h 108 mph | 171 km/h 106 mph |
Power comparison
Bar comparison chart for Power. Higher is better · hp / kW
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| Mercedes-BenzCLK (C208)Facelift 1999AMG CLK 55 V8 | 347 hp 259 kW |
| MGXpower SV4.6 i V8 32V | 320 hp 239 kW |
Mercedes-Benz CLK (C208) Facelift 1999 AMG CLK 55 V8 has 27 hp more than MG Xpower SV 4.6 i V8 32V.
The biggest power difference is between MG Xpower SV 4.6 i V8 32V and Mercedes-Benz CLK (C208) Facelift 1999 AMG CLK 55 V8: 27 hp (20 kW).
Torque comparison
Bar comparison chart for Torque. Higher is better · Nm / lb-ft
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| Mercedes-BenzCLK (C208)Facelift 1999AMG CLK 55 V8 | 510 Nm 376 lb-ft |
| MGXpower SV4.6 i V8 32V | 410 Nm 302 lb-ft |
Curb weight comparison
Bar comparison chart for Curb weight. Lower is better · kg / lb
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| Mercedes-BenzCLK (C208)Facelift 1999AMG CLK 55 V8 | 1,545 kg 3,406 lb |
| MGXpower SV4.6 i V8 32V | 1,540 kg 3,395 lb |
Top speed without limiter comparison
Bar comparison chart for Top speed without limiter. Higher is better · km/h / mph
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| Mercedes-BenzCLK (C208)Facelift 1999AMG CLK 55 V8 | Unrestricted 265 km/h165 mph Restricted 250 km/h155 mph |
| MGXpower SV4.6 i V8 32V | 254 km/h 158 mph |
0-100 km/h comparison
Bar comparison chart for 0-100 km/h. Lower is better · seconds
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| Mercedes-BenzCLK (C208)Facelift 1999AMG CLK 55 V8 | 5.4 s |
| MGXpower SV4.6 i V8 32V | 5.4 s |
Power-to-weight comparison
Bar comparison chart for Power-to-weight. Higher is better · hp/t / kW/t
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| Mercedes-BenzCLK (C208)Facelift 1999AMG CLK 55 V8 | 225 hp/t 167 kW/t 4.5 kg/hp |
| MGXpower SV4.6 i V8 32V | 208 hp/t 155 kW/t 4.8 kg/hp |
Performance spider chart
Radar chart comparing normalized performance and fuel-consumption scores.
| Vehicle | Power | Acceleration | Top speed |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mercedes-BenzCLK (C208)Facelift 1999AMG CLK 55 V8 | 347 hp 259 kW | 5.4 s | Unrestricted 265 km/h165 mph Restricted 250 km/h155 mph |
| MGXpower SV4.6 i V8 32V | 320 hp 239 kW | 5.4 s | 254 km/h 158 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 (C208)Facelift 1999AMG CLK 55 V8 |
|
| ||||||||||||||
| MGXpower SV4.6 i V8 32V |
|
| ||||||||||||||
Detailed score breakdown
| Vehicle | Mercedes-BenzCLK (C208)Facelift 1999AMG CLK 55 V8 | MGXpower SV4.6 i V8 32V | ||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power | 347 hp 259 kW | 320 hp 239 kW | ||||||||||||||||
| Torque | 510 Nm 376 lb-ft | 410 Nm 302 lb-ft | ||||||||||||||||
| Acceleration | 5.4 s | 5.4 s | ||||||||||||||||
| Top speed | Unrestricted 265 km/h165 mph Restricted 250 km/h155 mph | 254 km/h 158 mph | ||||||||||||||||
| Lightness | 1,545 kg 3,406 lb | 1,540 kg 3,395 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 | 420 L 14.8 cu ft | 250 L 8.8 cu ft | ||||||||||||||||
| Power-to-weight score | 225 hp/t 167 kW/t 4.5 kg/hp | 208 hp/t 155 kW/t 4.8 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 (C208) 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 (C208) Facelift 1999 AMG CLK 55 V8
- Has 27 hp more
- Has 100 Nm more
- Has 11 km/h (7 mph) higher top speed
- Has 17 hp/t better power-to-weight
- Has 170 L more trunk volume
Pros
- Quickest 0-100 km/h in this comparison
- Highest top speed
- Most powerful
- Highest torque
- Best power-to-weight ratio
- Largest trunk
Cons
- Heaviest
MG Xpower SV 4.6 i V8 32V
- Is 5 kg lighter
Pros
- Lightest
Cons
- Lowest power
- Lowest top speed
- Smallest trunk
Choose cars to compare
Popular comparisons























