2003 Mercedes-Benz CLK vs. 1982 Zastava 102
To start off, 2003 Mercedes-Benz CLK is newer by 21 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1982 Zastava 102. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1982 Zastava 102 would be higher. At 1,796 cc (4 cylinders), 2003 Mercedes-Benz CLK is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2003 Mercedes-Benz CLK (167 HP @ 5750 RPM) has 118 more horse power than 1982 Zastava 102. (49 HP @ 5500 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2003 Mercedes-Benz CLK should accelerate faster than 1982 Zastava 102. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2003 Mercedes-Benz CLK weights approximately 895 kg more than 1982 Zastava 102. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Let's talk about torque, 2003 Mercedes-Benz CLK (245 Nm @ 3000 RPM) has 150 more torque (in Nm) than 1982 Zastava 102. (95 Nm @ 3000 RPM). This means 2003 Mercedes-Benz CLK will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1982 Zastava 102.
Compare all specifications:
2003 Mercedes-Benz CLK | 1982 Zastava 102 | |
Make | Mercedes-Benz | Zastava |
Model | CLK | 102 |
Year Released | 2003 | 1982 |
Engine Size | 1796 cc | 1299 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 167 HP | 49 HP |
Engine RPM | 5750 RPM | 5500 RPM |
Torque | 245 Nm | 95 Nm |
Torque RPM | 3000 RPM | 3000 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Vehicle Weight | 1665 kg | 770 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4530 mm | 3500 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1750 mm | 1550 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1420 mm | 1340 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2720 mm | 2160 mm |