Two significantly similar cars, no doubt about that. Still, each one has something different to offer. Having both cars powered by petrol engines and utilizing the 2-door cabriolet body style within the same 'Sports car' segment, the only major difference here really is their wheel drive configuration (rear for the Mercedes Benz and 4 x 4 in the case of the Audi). The first one has a Mercedes Benz-engineered powertrain under the hood, a 6-cylinder, 24-valves 231hp unit, while the other one gets its power and torque from a 6-cylinder, 24-valves 250hp engine designed by Volkswagen.

The fact that the Audi got tested by the European New Car Assessment Programme (Euro NCAP), while the other contender didn't, offers a slight advantage, as the 4-star rating is better than none. That aside, let's consider some other aspects which affect safety. Both vehicles belong to the sports car segment, which is generally classifying them somewhere in the middle safety-wise, but it doesn't do much to help us decide between the two. Furthermore, when it comes to weight, a factor that most people underestimate, CLK offers a marginal difference of 9% more metal.

Reliability is not the best thing to consider on the make level, but it is worth mentioning that both brands display similar results in faults and breakdowns, all the models observed together. That's the official data, while our visitors describe reliability of Mercedes Benz with an average rating of 4.4, and models under the Audi badge with 4.1 out of 5. Some independent research have also placed CLK as average reliability-wise, and TT is more or less at the same level.Above it all, drivers of cars with the same engine as CLK rank it on average as 4.0, while the one under the competitor's bonnet gets 4.3 out of 5.

Audi is undoubtly more agile, reaching 100km/h in 1.6 seconds less than its competitor. In addition to that it accelerates all the way to 250 kilometers per hour, exactly the same as the other car does. When it comes to fuel economy the winner has to be CLK, averaging around 9.5 liters of fuel per 100 kilometers (30 mpg), in combined cycle. We can't ignore that 9% difference compared to Audi TT.

Audi appears just a bit more reliable, although the difference is truly marginal. The most important thing when deciding between any two vehicles should always be safety, both passive and active. In my opinion, everything taken into account, Audi TT offers much better overall protection, which launches it ahead of the other contender. It all continues in the same direction, with Audi being considerably quicker, thus putting more smile on driver's face. It does come at a cost though, and that's the fuel consumption... It's really tough to make a final decision here, but if I'd need to, I'd say Audi. Anyway, that's the most objective conclusion I could've came up with and it's based solely on the information found on this website. Aspects such as design, practicality, brand value and driving experience are there for you to measure them out. In case you have two minutes to spare I invite you to define your needs, desires and budget and see which car would be chosen by the virtual adviser™, among more than 12.000 different ones in our database.