Jeep Cherokee 2002 vs Land Rover Freelander 2003
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.8 Diesel | 2.0 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing chain | |
| Timing belt usually needs to be replaced more often than the chain, but it is usually significantly cheaper. Timing belt motors are generally quieter and less vibrating than chain motors. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 150 HP | 112 HP | |
| Torque: | 360 NM | 260 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12.6 seconds | 14.4 seconds | |
|
Jeep Cherokee is more dynamic to drive. Jeep Cherokee engine produces 38 HP more power than Land Rover Freelander, whereas torque is 100 NM more than Land Rover Freelander. Thanks to more power Jeep Cherokee reaches 100 km/h speed 1.8 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 9.9 | 7.6 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 10.9 l/100km | 8.1 l/100km | |
|
The Land Rover Freelander is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Jeep Cherokee consumes 2.3 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Land Rover Freelander, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Jeep Cherokee could require 345 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Jeep Cherokee consumes 2.8 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Land Rover Freelander. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 70 litres | 59 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 700 km in combined cycle | 770 km in combined cycle | |
| 860 km on highway | 880 km on highway | ||
| 640 km with real consumption | 720 km with real consumption | ||
| Land Rover Freelander 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: | 440'000 km | 420'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 7 years | 6 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Chrysler Grand Voyager, Chrysler Voyager | Used only for this car | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Jeep Cherokee might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.44 m | 4.45 m | |
| Width: | 1.82 m | 1.81 m | |
| Height: | 1.87 m | 1.71 m | |
| Jeep Cherokee is 1 cm shorter than the Land Rover Freelander, 1 cm wider, while the height of Jeep Cherokee is 16 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 820 litres | no data | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1950 litres | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.9 meters | 11.6 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Jeep Cherokee is 0.7 metres less than that of the Land Rover Freelander, which means Jeep Cherokee can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`540 | 2`000 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | no data | average | |
| Average price (€): | 3600 | 3200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Jeep Cherokee has
|
Land Rover Freelander has
| |