2000 Ford TS-50 vs. 2003 Mercedes-Benz SLK
To start off, 2003 Mercedes-Benz SLK is newer by 3 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2000 Ford TS-50. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2000 Ford TS-50 would be higher. At 2,297 cc (4 cylinders), 2003 Mercedes-Benz SLK is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2000 Ford TS-50 (128 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 34 more horse power than 2003 Mercedes-Benz SLK. (94 HP @ 5750 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2000 Ford TS-50 should accelerate faster than 2003 Mercedes-Benz SLK. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2003 Mercedes-Benz SLK weights approximately 227 kg more than 2000 Ford TS-50.
Both vehicles are rear wheel drive (RWD) - it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, both vehicles do the job better than front wheel drive vehicles. With that said, do keep in mind that many other factors such as speed and the wear on your tires can also have significant impact on traction and control. Let's talk about torque, 2003 Mercedes-Benz SLK (271 Nm) has 96 more torque (in Nm) than 2000 Ford TS-50. (175 Nm). This means 2003 Mercedes-Benz SLK will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2000 Ford TS-50.
Compare all specifications:
| 2000 Ford TS-50 | 2003 Mercedes-Benz SLK | |
| Make | Ford | Mercedes-Benz |
| Model | TS-50 | SLK |
| Year Released | 2000 | 2003 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1989 cc | 2297 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Horse Power | 128 HP | 94 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6000 RPM | 5750 RPM |
| Torque | 175 Nm | 271 Nm |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | Automatic |
| Vehicle Weight | 1208 kg | 1435 kg |
| Wheelbase Size | 2760 mm | 2410 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 132 L | 88 L |
