Compare Mercedes AMG GT Roadster vs Mercedes E-Class Cabriolet A238 vs Audi A5 B9 Cabriolet facelift
Variants
GT
GT C
GT S
AMG E 53 4MATIC+
E 200 M274 4MATIC
E 200 M274
E 200 M264 4MATIC
E 200 M264
E 220d 4MATIC
E 220d
E 300 M274
E 300 M264
E 300d
E 350
E 350d 4MATIC
E 350d
E 400 4MATIC
E 400d 4MATIC
E 450 Euro6d 4MATIC
E 450 4MATIC
35 TDI
35 TFSI
40 TDI
40 TDI MHEV quattro
40 TDI quattro
40 TFSI 190
40 TFSI 190 quattro
40 TFSI 204
45 TFSI 245 quattro
45 TFSI 265 quattro
50 TDI quattro
Capacity
Cargo Capacity
165 L / 5.8 cu-ft
Engine Oil Capacity
7.0 L / 7.4 qt
Fuel Capacity
65.0 L / 17.2 gal
Passengers
2
4
4
Chassis
Brakes | Front
Ventilated discs
Ventilated discs
Brakes | Rear
Ventilated discs
Ventilated discs
Disc
Offroad | Approach Angle
9.5 deg
Offroad | Breakover Angle
9.4 deg
Offroad | Departure Angle
14.0 deg
Power Steering
Electric Steering
Electric Steering
Electric Steering
Suspension | Front
Double-wishbone
Multi-link
Multi-link
Suspension | Rear
Double-wishbone
Multi-link
Multi-link
Turning Circle
11.5 m / 37.7 ft
Construction
Body Style
2-door Convertible
Dimensions
Ground Clearance
96 mm / 3.8 in
Size | Height
1384 mm / 54.5 in
Size | Length
4697 mm / 184.9 in
Size | Width
1939 mm / 76.3 in | 2075 mm / 81.7 in (mirror unfolded)
1846 mm / 72.7 in | 2029 mm / 79.9 in (mirror unfolded)
Track Width | Front
1587.0 mm / 62.5 in
Track Width | Rear
1651.0 mm / 65.0 in
1568.0 mm / 61.7 in
Wheelbase
2630 mm / 103.5 in
2873 mm / 113.1 in
2764 mm / 108.8 in
Performance
Coefficient Of Drag
0.38
0.29
Powertrain
Drivetrain Layout
Front-engine (longitudinal), Rear-wheel drive
Engine
M 178 DE 40 AL
Engine | Displacement
4.0 L / 243.0 cu-in / 3982.0 cc
Engine | Type
Bi-turbocharged direct-injected petrol V8 engine with 4 values per cylinder
Transmission | Gears
7-speed
Transmission | Type
Double clutch transmission (DCT)
Production
Availability
2017
Reviews
Neofiliac score
91%
77%
65%
Pros
- Good performance overall
- Relatively tight and light
- Robust drivetrain
- Much improved, almost luxurious styling
- Improved build quality
- Good 0.28 drag coefficient
- Good suspension setup
- Top-down motoring made possible for company car users
- Good 0.26 drag coefficient
Cons
- High 0.38 drag coefficient
- Very little cargo space
- No more V8
- Downsized engines
- Too many electronics
- AWD nonsense
- Ugly
- FWD-based
- Nose-heavy
- No manual transmission
Remove
Remove
Remove
Add up to 4 products to the comparison using the search bar above
Information on this page is provided on an as-is basis. No warranty on accuracy is implied. This page may contain affiliate links to third-party merchants such as Amazon and eBay. If you make a purchase using the supplied link, we may receive a commission. Neofiliac places the utmost respect for your privacy. We use no cookie whatsoever beyond that needed for the proper functioning of the website.