2006 Dodge Charger vs. 2004 Mercedes-Benz C
To start off, 2006 Dodge Charger is newer by 2 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2004 Mercedes-Benz C. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2004 Mercedes-Benz C would be higher. At 6,063 cc, 2006 Dodge Charger is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2006 Dodge Charger (425 HP @ 6200 RPM) has 264 more horse power than 2004 Mercedes-Benz C. (161 HP @ 4200 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2006 Dodge Charger should accelerate faster than 2004 Mercedes-Benz C.
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, 2006 Dodge Charger (570 Nm) has 330 more torque (in Nm) than 2004 Mercedes-Benz C. (240 Nm). This means 2006 Dodge Charger will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2004 Mercedes-Benz C.
Compare all specifications:
2006 Dodge Charger | 2004 Mercedes-Benz C | |
Make | Dodge | Mercedes-Benz |
Model | Charger | C |
Year Released | 2006 | 2004 |
Body Type | Sedan | Station Wagon |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 6063 cc | 2685 cc |
Horse Power | 425 HP | 161 HP |
Engine RPM | 6200 RPM | 4200 RPM |
Torque | 570 Nm | 240 Nm |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 5 doors |
Vehicle Length | 5090 mm | 4550 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1900 mm | 1730 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1480 mm | 1450 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 3050 mm | 2720 mm |
Fuel Consumption Highway | 11.8 L/100km | 9.4 L/100km |
Fuel Consumption City | 16.8 L/100km | 12.4 L/100km |
Fuel Consumption Overall | 14.7 L/100km | 11.2 L/100km |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 72 L | 62 L |