C 300 vs Continental 3.0T Reserve Comparison
Car Information
Engine / Motor
250
250 km/h
Dimensions
5 Seater
5 Seater
4 Doors
/
4,751 mm
5115 mm
1,820 mm
2090 mm
1,442 mm
1487 mm
2,865 mm
2994 mm
/
473 L
Fuel Economy
6.6-7.0 L/100km
10.4 Km/L
66 L
68 L
11 Km/L
10.4 Km/L
Comfort
/
✓
/
✓
Interior
/
✓
Safety
/
✓
Transmission
9-speed automatic
/
Chassis & Steering
Rear Drive
All Wheel Drive
Key Spec
TBD
3.0 L - 3.7 L
TBD
309 BHP - 400 BHP
TBD
Automatic
TBD
Gasoline
TBD
TBD
TBD
5 Seater
Engine
2.0T
3.0 L
Petrol
Gasoline
255 BHP
400 BHP
400 Nm
575 Nm
Exterior
/
✓
Technologies
/
✓
Comparison of configuration highlights
C 300
Continental 3.0T Reserve
- Parking sensor rear
- Parking sensor front
- ABS
Review Comparison
Positive
- No data found
Negative
- No data found
Positive
- No data found
Negative
- No data found
Related comparisons
Editor's PickContinental 3.0T Reserve
Expert / Editor Recommendation
Choose C 300 if you care more about overall equipment; choose Continental 3.0T Reserve if you care more about fuel economy.
Q&A
- According to fuel consumption data, C 300 has a fuel consumption of 15.15, while Continental 3.0T Reserve has a fuel consumption of 9.62. Therefore, Continental 3.0T Reserve is more fuel-efficient.
- In terms of interior space, C 300 has a wheelbase of 2,865 mm , while Continental 3.0T Reserve has a wheelbase of 2994 mm. Generally, the model with the longer wheelbase, Continental 3.0T Reserve, offers more room.
- Check drive type, ground clearance and torque together. C 300 uses Rear Drive, while Continental 3.0T Reserve uses All Wheel Drive.