Mercedes-Benz E-class (W212) · Facelift 2013
Car comparison
Mercedes-Benz E-class (W212) · Facelift 2013 E 220 BlueTECvsPeugeot 408 II 1.6 THP
Compare specs, acceleration, fuel consumption, dimensions, practicality, and estimated running costs side by side.
New comparisonPeugeot 408 II
1.6 THP
Comparison overview
Use the estimates as comparison hints and verify exact figures before making decisions.
Best choices
Mercedes-Benz E-class (W212) Facelift 2013 E 220 BlueTEC
- Quickest 0-100 km/h8.2 s
- Fastest top speed230 km/h143 mph
- Most powerful170 hp127 kW
- Highest torque400 Nm295 lb-ft
- Lowest combined fuel consumption4.7 L/100 km50.0 mpg US60.1 mpg UK
- Best estimated range1,255 km780 mi
- Largest trunk490 L
- Best overall score57/100
- Best performance score49/100
- Best economy score94/100
- Best practicality score75/100
Peugeot 408 II 1.6 THP
- Lightest1,415 kg3,120 lb
- Best power-to-weight118 hp/t88 kW/t8.5 kg/hp
Specification comparison
| Model | Mercedes-BenzE-class (W212)Facelift 2013E 220 BlueTEC | Peugeot408 II1.6 THP |
|---|---|---|
| Power | 170hp127kW | 167hp125kW |
| Torque | 400Nm295lb-ft | 245Nm181lb-ft |
| Curb weight | 1,685kg3,715lb | 1,415kg3,120lb |
| Gross weight | 2,345kg5,170lb | - |
| Top speed | 230 km/h 143 mph | 215 km/h 134 mph |
| To 99% top speed | 76.4s99% target: 228 km/h / 141 mph Calculated | 66.7s99% target: 213 km/h / 132 mph Calculated |
| 0-100 km/h | 8.2s | 8.2s |
| 0-200 km/h | 32.0s Calculated | 37.6s Calculated |
| 0-60 mph | 7.8s Calculated | 7.8s Calculated |
| Fuel consumption | 4.7L/100 km50mpg US60.1mpg UK | 5.9L/100 km39.9mpg US47.9mpg UK |
| Fuel consumption city | 5.6L/100 km42mpg US50.4mpg UK | - |
| Fuel consumption highway | 4.2L/100 km56mpg US67.3mpg UK | - |
| Quarter mile | 15.9s Calculated | 16.0s Calculated |
| Power-to-weight | 101hp/t75kW/t46hp/1000 lb Calculated | 118hp/t88kW/t54hp/1000 lb Calculated |
| Torque-to-weight | 237Nm/t159lb-ft/ton Calculated | 173Nm/t116lb-ft/ton Calculated |
| Estimated range | 1,255km780mi Calculated | 898km558mi Calculated |
| Displacement | 2,143cc131cu in | 1,598cc98cu in |
| Length | 4,879mm192in | 4,750mm187in |
| Width | 1,854mm73in | 1,820mm72in |
| Height | 1,474mm58in | 1,488mm59in |
| Wheelbase | 2,874mm113in | 2,730mm107in |
| Front track | 1,598mm63in | 1,555mm61in |
| Rear track | 1,614mm64in | 1,550mm61in |
| Ground clearance | - | 124mm5in |
| Trunk volume | 490L | 455L |
| Doors | 4 | 4 |
| Seats | 5 | 5 |
| Fuel tank | 59L | 53L |
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 E-class (W212) Facelift 2013 E 220 BlueTEC: Power / Torque
- Peugeot 408 II 1.6 THP: Power / Torque
| Vehicle | Peak power RPM | Peak torque RPM | Max engine speed |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mercedes-BenzE-class (W212)Facelift 2013E 220 BlueTEC | 3,000-4,200 rpm | 1,400-2,800 rpm | 4,450 rpm |
| Peugeot408 II1.6 THP | 6,000 rpm | 1,400-4,000 rpm | 6,250 rpm |
Acceleration curve
Estimated speed over time for selected vehicles.
| Metric | Mercedes-BenzE-class (W212)Facelift 2013E 220 BlueTEC | Peugeot408 II1.6 THP |
|---|---|---|
| Acceleration checkpoints | ||
0-60 mph 0-97 km/h | 7.8 s | 7.8 s |
0-100 km/h 0-62 mph | 8.2 s | 8.2 s |
0-200 km/h 0-124 mph | 32.0 s | 37.6 s |
| Top speed | 230 km/h 143 mph | 215 km/h 134 mph |
| Drag race simulation | ||
60 ft 18 m | 2.8 s | 2.8 s |
330 ft 101 m | 7.2 s | 7.1 s |
1/8 mile 201 m | 10.6 s | 10.6 s |
1000 ft 305 m | 13.5 s | 13.5 s |
1/4 mile 402 m | 15.9 s | 16.0 s |
Trap speed 1/4 mile 402 m | 150 km/h 94 mph | 149 km/h 93 mph |
Power comparison
Bar comparison chart for Power. Higher is better · hp / kW
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| Mercedes-BenzE-class (W212)Facelift 2013E 220 BlueTEC | 170 hp 127 kW |
| Peugeot408 II1.6 THP | 167 hp 125 kW |
Mercedes-Benz E-class (W212) Facelift 2013 E 220 BlueTEC has 3 hp more than Peugeot 408 II 1.6 THP.
The biggest power difference is between Peugeot 408 II 1.6 THP and Mercedes-Benz E-class (W212) Facelift 2013 E 220 BlueTEC: 3 hp (2 kW).
Torque comparison
Bar comparison chart for Torque. Higher is better · Nm / lb-ft
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| Mercedes-BenzE-class (W212)Facelift 2013E 220 BlueTEC | 400 Nm 295 lb-ft |
| Peugeot408 II1.6 THP | 245 Nm 181 lb-ft |
Curb weight comparison
Bar comparison chart for Curb weight. Lower is better · kg / lb
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| Mercedes-BenzE-class (W212)Facelift 2013E 220 BlueTEC | 1,685 kg 3,715 lb |
| Peugeot408 II1.6 THP | 1,415 kg 3,120 lb |
Top speed without limiter comparison
Bar comparison chart for Top speed without limiter. Higher is better · km/h / mph
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| Mercedes-BenzE-class (W212)Facelift 2013E 220 BlueTEC | 230 km/h 143 mph |
| Peugeot408 II1.6 THP | 215 km/h 134 mph |
0-100 km/h comparison
Bar comparison chart for 0-100 km/h. Lower is better · seconds
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| Mercedes-BenzE-class (W212)Facelift 2013E 220 BlueTEC | 8.2 s |
| Peugeot408 II1.6 THP | 8.2 s |
Fuel consumption comparison
Bar comparison chart for Fuel consumption. Lower is better · L/100 km / mpg US / mpg UK
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| Mercedes-BenzE-class (W212)Facelift 2013E 220 BlueTEC | 4.7 L/100 km 50.0 mpg US 60.1 mpg UK |
| Peugeot408 II1.6 THP | 5.9 L/100 km 39.9 mpg US 47.9 mpg UK |
The biggest fuel consumption difference is between Mercedes-Benz E-class (W212) Facelift 2013 E 220 BlueTEC and Peugeot 408 II 1.6 THP: 1.2 L/100 km.
Power-to-weight comparison
Bar comparison chart for Power-to-weight. Higher is better · hp/t / kW/t
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| Mercedes-BenzE-class (W212)Facelift 2013E 220 BlueTEC | 101 hp/t 75 kW/t 9.9 kg/hp |
| Peugeot408 II1.6 THP | 118 hp/t 88 kW/t 8.5 kg/hp |
Estimated range comparison
Bar comparison chart for Estimated range. Higher is better · km / mi
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| Mercedes-BenzE-class (W212)Facelift 2013E 220 BlueTEC | 1,255 km 780 mi |
| Peugeot408 II1.6 THP | 898 km 558 mi |
Performance spider chart
Radar chart comparing normalized performance and fuel-consumption scores.
| Vehicle | Power | Acceleration | Top speed |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mercedes-BenzE-class (W212)Facelift 2013E 220 BlueTEC | 170 hp 127 kW | 8.2 s | 230 km/h 143 mph |
| Peugeot408 II1.6 THP | 167 hp 125 kW | 8.2 s | 215 km/h 134 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-BenzE-class (W212)Facelift 2013E 220 BlueTEC |
|
| ||||||||||||||
| Peugeot408 II1.6 THP |
|
| ||||||||||||||
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-BenzE-class (W212)Facelift 2013E 220 BlueTEC |
| 4.7 L/100 km 50.0 mpg US 60.1 mpg UK | ||||||
| Peugeot408 II1.6 THP |
| 5.9 L/100 km 39.9 mpg US 47.9 mpg UK | ||||||
Mercedes-Benz E-class (W212) Facelift 2013 E 220 BlueTEC 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-BenzE-class (W212)Facelift 2013E 220 BlueTEC | 4.7 L/100 km 50.0 mpg US 60.1 mpg UK | 8.2 s |
| Peugeot408 II1.6 THP | 5.9 L/100 km 39.9 mpg US 47.9 mpg UK | 8.2 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-BenzE-class (W212)Facelift 2013E 220 BlueTEC | 101 hp/t 75 kW/t 9.9 kg/hp | 4.7 L/100 km 50.0 mpg US 60.1 mpg UK |
| Peugeot408 II1.6 THP | 118 hp/t 88 kW/t 8.5 kg/hp | 5.9 L/100 km 39.9 mpg US 47.9 mpg UK |
Detailed score breakdown
| Vehicle | Mercedes-BenzE-class (W212)Facelift 2013E 220 BlueTEC | Peugeot408 II1.6 THP | ||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power | 170 hp 127 kW | 167 hp 125 kW | ||||||||||||||||
| Torque | 400 Nm 295 lb-ft | 245 Nm 181 lb-ft | ||||||||||||||||
| Acceleration | 8.2 s | 8.2 s | ||||||||||||||||
| Top speed | 230 km/h 143 mph | 215 km/h 134 mph | ||||||||||||||||
| Lightness | 1,685 kg 3,715 lb | 1,415 kg 3,120 lb | ||||||||||||||||
| Fuel consumption | 4.7 L/100 km 50.0 mpg US 60.1 mpg UK | 5.9 L/100 km 39.9 mpg US 47.9 mpg UK | ||||||||||||||||
| Practicality |
|
| ||||||||||||||||
| Range score | 1,255 km 780 mi | 898 km 558 mi | ||||||||||||||||
| Trunk score | 490 L 17.3 cu ft | 455 L 16.1 cu ft | ||||||||||||||||
| Power-to-weight score | 101 hp/t 75 kW/t 9.9 kg/hp | 118 hp/t 88 kW/t 8.5 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 E-class (W212) Facelift 2013 E 220 BlueTEC | Peugeot 408 II 1.6 THP |
|---|---|---|
| Consumption | 4.7 L/100 km50 mpg US60.1 mpg UK | 5.9 L/100 km39.9 mpg US47.9 mpg UK |
| Cost / 100 km | 8.23 LC100 km | 10.33 LC100 km |
| Cost / 100 mi | 13.24 LC100 mi | 16.62 LC100 mi |
| Annual fuel used | 705 L186 US gal155 UK gal | 885 L234 US gal195 UK gal |
| Annual fuel cost | 1,234 LC/year | 1,549 LC/year |
Head-to-head comparisons
Mercedes-Benz E-class (W212) Facelift 2013 E 220 BlueTEC
- Has 3 hp more
- Has 155 Nm more
- Has 15 km/h (9 mph) higher top speed
- Uses 1.2 L/100 km less fuel
- Has 357 km (222 mi) more estimated range
- Has 35 L more trunk volume
Pros
- Quickest 0-100 km/h in this comparison
- Highest top speed
- Most powerful
- Highest torque
- Lowest combined fuel consumption
- Best estimated range
- Largest trunk
Cons
- Heaviest
Peugeot 408 II 1.6 THP
- Is 270 kg lighter
- Has 17 hp/t better power-to-weight
Pros
- Lightest
- Best power-to-weight ratio
Cons
- Lowest power
- Highest combined fuel consumption
- Lowest top speed
- Smallest trunk
Choose cars to compare
Popular comparisons























