2002 MCC Crossblade vs. 2005 Mercedes-Benz C
To start off, 2005 Mercedes-Benz C is newer by 3 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2002 MCC Crossblade. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2002 MCC Crossblade would be higher. At 2,685 cc (6 cylinders), 2005 Mercedes-Benz C is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2005 Mercedes-Benz C (160 HP) has 90 more horse power than 2002 MCC Crossblade. (70 HP) In normal driving conditions, 2005 Mercedes-Benz C should accelerate faster than 2002 MCC Crossblade. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2005 Mercedes-Benz C weights approximately 838 kg more than 2002 MCC Crossblade. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
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, 2005 Mercedes-Benz C (240 Nm) has 138 more torque (in Nm) than 2002 MCC Crossblade. (102 Nm). This means 2005 Mercedes-Benz C will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2002 MCC Crossblade.
Compare all specifications:
| 2002 MCC Crossblade | 2005 Mercedes-Benz C | |
| Make | MCC | Mercedes-Benz |
| Model | Crossblade | C |
| Year Released | 2002 | 2005 |
| Engine Size | 599 cc | 2685 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 3 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Horse Power | 70 HP | 160 HP |
| Torque | 102 Nm | 240 Nm |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Vehicle Weight | 740 kg | 1578 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 2630 mm | 4550 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1630 mm | 1730 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1520 mm | 1470 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 1810 mm | 2720 mm |
