Jeep Commander 2006 vs Porsche Cayenne 2007
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 3.0 Diesel | 3.6 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 218 HP | 290 HP | |
| Torque: | 510 NM | 385 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9 seconds | 8.5 seconds | |
|
Porsche Cayenne is a more dynamic driving. Jeep Commander engine produces 72 HP less power than Porsche Cayenne, but torque is 125 NM more than Porsche Cayenne. Due to the lower power, Jeep Commander reaches 100 km/h speed 0.5 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 10.8 | 12.9 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 12.2 l/100km | 13.2 l/100km | |
|
The Jeep Commander is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Jeep Commander consumes 2.1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Porsche Cayenne, which means that by driving the Jeep Commander over 15,000 km in a year you can save 315 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Jeep Commander consumes 1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Porsche Cayenne. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 78 litres | 100 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 720 km in combined cycle | 770 km in combined cycle | |
| 840 km on highway | 1010 km on highway | ||
| 630 km with real consumption | 750 km with real consumption | ||
| Porsche Cayenne 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 | 370'000 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 Jeep Commander engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 5 years | 3 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Jeep Grand Cherokee, Chrysler 300C | 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 Commander might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| 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 | 4.80 m | |
| Width: | 1.90 m | 1.93 m | |
| Height: | 1.83 m | 1.70 m | |
|
Jeep Commander is smaller, but higher. Jeep Commander is 1 cm shorter than the Porsche Cayenne, 3 cm narrower, while the height of Jeep Commander is 13 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 212 litres | 540 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1940 litres | 1770 litres | |
| Jeep Commander has 328 litres less trunk space than the Porsche Cayenne. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Jeep Commander (by 170 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.2 meters | 11.4 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Jeep Commander is 0.2 metres less than that of the Porsche Cayenne. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 3`500 | 2`945 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | high | |
| Average price (€): | 9400 | 10 400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Jeep Commander has
|
Porsche Cayenne has
| |