2006 Mazda 3 vs. 2004 Mercedes-Benz CLK
To start off, 2006 Mazda 3 is newer by 2 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2004 Mercedes-Benz CLK. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2004 Mercedes-Benz CLK would be higher. At 1,999 cc, 2006 Mazda 3 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2004 Mercedes-Benz CLK (167 HP @ 5750 RPM) has 17 more horse power than 2006 Mazda 3. (150 HP @ 6500 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2004 Mercedes-Benz CLK should accelerate faster than 2006 Mazda 3.
Because 2004 Mercedes-Benz CLK is rear wheel drive (RWD), it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, it will be much easier to do with 2004 Mercedes-Benz CLK. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2006 Mazda 3, being front wheel drive (FWD), will offer much better control with better grip. 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, 2004 Mercedes-Benz CLK (245 Nm @ 3000 RPM) has 62 more torque (in Nm) than 2006 Mazda 3. (183 Nm @ 4500 RPM). This means 2004 Mercedes-Benz CLK will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2006 Mazda 3.
Compare all specifications:
| 2006 Mazda 3 | 2004 Mercedes-Benz CLK | |
| Make | Mazda | Mercedes-Benz |
| Model | 3 | CLK |
| Year Released | 2006 | 2004 |
| Body Type | Sedan | Convertible |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1999 cc | 1795 cc |
| Horse Power | 150 HP | 167 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6500 RPM | 5750 RPM |
| Torque | 183 Nm | 245 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 4500 RPM | 3000 RPM |
| Drive Type | Front | Rear |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 2 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 4540 mm | 4530 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1760 mm | 1750 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1470 mm | 1420 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2650 mm | 2720 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 55 L | 62 L |
