Jeep Commander 2006 vs Toyota Land Cruiser 2009
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 3.0 Diesel | 3.0 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing belt | |
| Engine chain usually needs to be replaced less often than the timing belt, but the cost of replacing the chain is usually higher. Chain motors are considered to be more reliable, but noisier and more vibration generating. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 218 HP | 173 HP | |
| Torque: | 510 NM | 410 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9 seconds | 11.7 seconds | |
|
Jeep Commander is more dynamic to drive. Jeep Commander engine produces 45 HP more power than Toyota Land Cruiser, whereas torque is 100 NM more than Toyota Land Cruiser. Thanks to more power Jeep Commander reaches 100 km/h speed 2.7 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 10.8 | 8.1 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 12.2 l/100km | 11.8 l/100km | |
|
The Toyota Land Cruiser is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Jeep Commander consumes 2.7 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Toyota Land Cruiser, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Jeep Commander could require 405 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Jeep Commander consumes 0.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Toyota Land Cruiser. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 78 litres | 87 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 720 km in combined cycle | 1070 km in combined cycle | |
| 840 km on highway | 1290 km on highway | ||
| 630 km with real consumption | 730 km with real consumption | ||
| Toyota Land Cruiser 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: | 5 years | 24 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Jeep Grand Cherokee, Chrysler 300C | Used also on Toyota Hilux | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. | |||
| 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 | 4.76 m | |
| Width: | 1.90 m | 1.89 m | |
| Height: | 1.83 m | 1.89 m | |
|
Jeep Commander is larger, but lower. Jeep Commander is 3 cm longer than the Toyota Land Cruiser, 2 cm wider, while the height of Jeep Commander is 6 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 212 litres | 104 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1940 litres | 1930 litres | |
|
Jeep Commander has more luggage capacity. Jeep Commander has 108 litres more trunk space than the Toyota Land Cruiser. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Jeep Commander (by 10 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.2 meters | 11.6 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Jeep Commander is 0.4 metres less than that of the Toyota Land Cruiser, which means Jeep Commander can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 3`500 | 2`990 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 9200 | 19 800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Jeep Commander has
|
Toyota Land Cruiser has
| |