| 1 | 0 | 3 | 4 | 3 | 4 |
2013 Mercedes-Benz GLK and 2016 BMW X1 Specifications
| Model Year | 2013 | 2016 | |
| Model | Mercedes-Benz GLK | BMW X1 | |
| Engine | 3.5L V6 DOHC-4v 302 hp@6500 273 lb-ft@3500 |
turbocharged 2.0L I4 DOHC-4v 228 hp@5000 258 lb-ft@1250 |
|
| Transmission | 7-speed shiftable automatic | 8-speed shiftable automatic | |
| Drivetrain | AWD | AWD | |
| Body | 4dr SUV | 4dr SUV | |
| Difference | |||
| Wheelbase | 108.5 in | 105.1 in | 3.4 in |
| Length | 178.3 in | 174.8 in | 3.5 in |
| Width | 74.3 in | 71.7 in | 2.6 in |
| Height | 66.9 in | 63.5 in | 3.4 in |
| Curb Weight | 4079 lb. | 3660 lb. | 419 lb. |
| Fuel Capacity | 17.4 gal. | 16.1 gal. | 1.3 gal. |
| Headroom, Row 1 | 39.8 in | 42.0 in | -2.2 in |
| Shoulder Room, Row 1 | 55.2 in | 56.7 in | -1.5 in |
| Hip Room, Row 1 | 53.2 in | 0.0 in | 53.2 in |
| Legroom, Row 1 | 41.4 in | 40.4 in | 1 in |
| Headroom, Row 2 | 39.7 in | 39.4 in | 0.3 in |
| Shoulder Room, Row 2 | 55.4 in | 57.2 in | -1.8 in |
| Hip Room, Row 2 | 52.5 in | 0.0 in | 52.5 in |
| Legroom, Row 2 | 35.1 in | 37.0 in | -1.9 in |
| Total Legroom | 76.5 in (over 2 rows) | 77.4 in (over 2 rows) | -0.9 in |
| Cargo Volume, Minimum | 23.3 ft3 | 27.1 ft3 | -3.8 ft3 |
| Cargo Volume, Maximum | 54.7 ft3 | 58.7 ft3 | -4 ft3 |
TrueDelta Reviews the Seat Room and Comfort of the 2013 Mercedes-Benz GLK
| 2013 Mercedes-Benz GLK Seat Room and Comfort: Cons | ||
| Year | Comment | |
| Expect the GLK to grow when it is next fully redesigned. A smaller MLK is on the way to battle the upcoming Audi Q3 and just-arrived BMW X1. For 2013, the GLK's body structure remains essentially the same, so rear seat knee room remains just sufficient for a man of average height sitting behind another such man. (Headroom, on the other hand, is abundant.) Among competitors, only the Infiniti EX37 has a tighter rear seat. The Audi, BMW, and Volvo all offer knees another inch or three. Seat comfort is debatable. To my bottom, the GLK's seats feel overly firm. Cargo space is similarly short of the segment average. The GLK's 54.7 cubic feet isn't far behind the Audi's 57.3 but well below the X3's 63.3. That truncated tail has a downside beyond aesthetics. But do these shortcomings really matter? For most people nearly all of the time, there's enough space. see full Mercedes-Benz GLK review | ||
What Our Members Are Saying about the Seat Room and Comfort of the 2013 Mercedes-Benz GLK
| 2013 Mercedes-Benz GLK Seat Room and Comfort: Cons | ||
| Year | Body/Powertrain | Comment |
| 2013 | 4dr SUV turbocharged 168hp 2.1L I4 Diesel 7-speed shiftable automatic AWD |
We are a couple with no kids and we rarely have visitors so the cramped rear seating is not a problem. Someone with teenage kids will want to seriously reconsider before getting a GLK. I know my Mom would not appreciate the ingress/egress ease as she has some limited mobility. see full Mercedes-Benz GLK review |
TrueDelta Reviews the Seat Room and Comfort of the 2016 BMW X1
| 2016 BMW X1 Seat Room and Comfort: Pros | ||
| Year | Comment | |
| 2016 | When the engine and transmission are mounted sideways, much more space can be allocated for passengers and cargo. Compared to the BMW X3, which has a longitudinal powertrain, the X1 is nine inches shorter (175 vs. 184), two inches narrower (72 vs. 74), and two inches lower (64 vs. 66), yet it has a little more headroom, rear shoulder room, and legroom. A funny thing: according to the official specs, the 2013-2015 X1 had only an inch less combined legroom than the new one. The difference feels much greater. It helps that the seats are mounted higher in the new X1. Even the largest feet can fit beneath the front seats at a comfortable angle. Want to tap your toes while riding in back? Go for it, there's plenty of space under there--a rarity among upscale cars. This combined with the relatively high rear seat cushion means that the average adult (e.g. 5-9 me) enjoys sufficient thigh support, which is often lacking in much larger crossovers. When all the way back, a $300 sliding and reclining second-row seat adds another inch of rear legroom. Though worthwhile overall, its seat backs return to a fully vertical position after being folded. Each of its three sections must then be reset one by one at a comfortable angle, a nuisance. The Audi Q3's rear seat is far tighter. The spec sheet suggests a mere 31 inches of rear legroom, a considerable half-foot less than in the new X1. In reality the Audi's rear seat doesn't seem quite that tight. I can sit behind myself with at most two inches of knee room to spare, vs. about five in the BMW. Still, with a tall driver the Q3's rear legroom would becomes essentially zero. The Lincoln MKC's rear seat isn't much roomier than the Audi's, while the Lexus NX has about as much rear knee room as the BMW but a lower seat cushion and less foot room beneath its front seats. Though the new Mini Clubman shares both the new UKL platform and a 105-inch wheelbase with the 2016 X1, its roof is seven inches lower, a big difference, and its seats are mounted lower than those in the average car, much less a crossover. There's perhaps an inch more knee room than in the Audi. The next Mini Countryman should be close in size to the X1. see full BMW X1 review | |
What Our Members Are Saying about the Seat Room and Comfort of the 2016 BMW X1
None of our members have yet commented on the seat room and comfort of the 2016 BMW X1.
See TrueDelta's information for all SUVs
See TrueDelta's information for all Mercedes-Benz models.
