Jeep Commander 2006 vs Volvo XC90 2006
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 4.7 Petrol | 4.4 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 231 HP | 315 HP | |
| Torque: | 410 NM | 440 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.5 seconds | 7.3 seconds | |
|
Volvo XC90 is a more dynamic driving. Jeep Commander engine produces 84 HP less power than Volvo XC90, whereas torque is 30 NM less than Volvo XC90. Due to the lower power, Jeep Commander reaches 100 km/h speed 2.2 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 14.8 | 13.5 | |
|
The Volvo XC90 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Jeep Commander consumes 1.3 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volvo XC90, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Jeep Commander could require 195 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 78 litres | 80 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 520 km in combined cycle | 590 km in combined cycle | |
| 630 km on highway | 810 km on highway | ||
| Volvo XC90 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 480'000 km | 700'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used, but under equal conditions the average life of a Volvo XC90 engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 15 years | 5 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Jeep Grand Cherokee | Used also on Volvo S80 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Jeep Commander might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The Jeep Commander engine has hydraulic tappets (lifters), providing quieter operation and no need for periodic adjustment, but they are more complex in design and can cause serious engine damage in case of failure. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.79 m | 4.81 m | |
| Width: | 1.90 m | 1.90 m | |
| Height: | 1.83 m | 1.78 m | |
| Jeep Commander is 2 cm shorter than the Volvo XC90, width is practically the same , while the height of Jeep Commander is 5 cm higher. | |||
| Seats: | no data | 7 seats | |
| Trunk capacity: | 212 litres | 249 litres | |
| Trunk capacity with 7 seats: | no data | 249 litres | |
| Trunk capacity with 5 seats: | 212 litres | 613 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1950 litres | 1837 litres | |
| In 5-seat version Volvo XC90 has more luggage space (by 401 litres). The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Jeep Commander (by 113 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.8 meters | 12.5 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Jeep Commander is 0.7 metres less than that of the Volvo XC90, which means Jeep Commander can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 3`500 | 2`770 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | low | |
| Average price (€): | 9200 | 9000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Jeep Commander has
|
Volvo XC90 has
| |