Jeep Commander 2006 vs Nissan Murano 2002
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 3.0 Diesel | 3.5 Petrol | |
| Diesel (Jeep Commander) engines typically outperform gasoline engines in terms of fuel efficiency and low-end torque. This makes them more economical and better suited for towing or long-distance travel. However, gasoline (Nissan Murano) engines mostly are lighter, quieter, and offer better acceleration and responsiveness, especially in smaller vehicles. For more information, see the article "Diesel or Petrol: Fuel Economy and Key Differences." | |||
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 218 HP | 248 HP | |
| Torque: | 510 NM | 333 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9 seconds | 8.5 seconds | |
|
Nissan Murano is a more dynamic driving. Jeep Commander engine produces 30 HP less power than Nissan Murano, but torque is 177 NM more than Nissan Murano. Due to the lower power, Jeep Commander reaches 100 km/h speed 0.5 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 10.8 | 12.3 | |
|
The Jeep Commander is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Jeep Commander consumes 1.5 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Nissan Murano, which means that by driving the Jeep Commander over 15,000 km in a year you can save 225 litres of fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 78 litres | 82 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 720 km in combined cycle | 660 km in combined cycle | |
| 840 km on highway | 860 km on highway | ||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 5 years | 26 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Jeep Grand Cherokee, Chrysler 300C | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Infiniti FX, Nissan Pathfinder | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Nissan Murano 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. | |||
| Jeep Commander 2006 3.0 engine: The main issues with this diesel engine stem from the fuel system and its sensitive piezo injectors. These injectors are known for being highly demanding in terms of fuel quality, which can lead to performance ... More about Jeep Commander 2006 3.0 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.79 m | 4.77 m | |
| Width: | 1.90 m | 1.88 m | |
| Height: | 1.83 m | 1.69 m | |
|
Jeep Commander is larger. Jeep Commander is 3 cm longer than the Nissan Murano, 2 cm wider, while the height of Jeep Commander is 14 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 212 litres | 923 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1940 litres | 2005 litres | |
|
Nissan Murano has more luggage space. Despite its longer length, Jeep Commander has 711 litres less trunk space than the Nissan Murano. This could mean that the Jeep Commander uses more space in the cabin, so the driver and passengers could be more spacious and comfortable. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Nissan Murano (by 65 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.2 meters | no data | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 3`500 | 2`295 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 8000 | 2400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Jeep Commander has
|
Nissan Murano has
| |