Jeep Commander 2006 vs Nissan Pathfinder 2005
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 3.0 Diesel | 2.5 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Double-row timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 218 HP | 174 HP | |
| Torque: | 510 NM | 403 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9 seconds | 11.6 seconds | |
|
Jeep Commander is more dynamic to drive. Jeep Commander engine produces 44 HP more power than Nissan Pathfinder, whereas torque is 107 NM more than Nissan Pathfinder. Thanks to more power Jeep Commander reaches 100 km/h speed 2.6 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 10.8 | 10.1 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 12.2 l/100km | 11.1 l/100km | |
|
The Nissan Pathfinder is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Jeep Commander consumes 0.7 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Nissan Pathfinder, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Jeep Commander could require 105 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Jeep Commander consumes 1.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Nissan Pathfinder. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 78 litres | 80 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 720 km in combined cycle | 790 km in combined cycle | |
| 840 km on highway | 960 km on highway | ||
| 630 km with real consumption | 720 km with real consumption | ||
| Nissan Pathfinder 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 | 440'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 5 years | 27 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 Nissan Navara, Nissan Murano | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Nissan Pathfinder 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 | 4.74 m | |
| Width: | 1.90 m | 1.85 m | |
| Height: | 1.83 m | 1.78 m | |
|
Jeep Commander is larger. Jeep Commander is 5 cm longer than the Nissan Pathfinder, 5 cm wider, while the height of Jeep Commander is 5 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 212 litres | 515 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1940 litres | 2091 litres | |
|
Nissan Pathfinder has more luggage space. Despite its longer length, Jeep Commander has 303 litres less trunk space than the Nissan Pathfinder. 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 Pathfinder (by 151 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.2 meters | 12.4 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Jeep Commander is 1.2 metres less than that of the Nissan Pathfinder, which means Jeep Commander can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 3`500 | 2`880 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 9400 | 6400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Jeep Commander has
|
Nissan Pathfinder has
| |