Jeep Commander 2006 vs Jeep Grand Cherokee 2005
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 3.0 Diesel | 3.0 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 218 HP | 218 HP | |
| Torque: | 510 NM | 510 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9 seconds | 9 seconds | |
| Jeep Commander and Jeep Grand Cherokee have the same engine power, the torque is the same for both cars. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 10.8 | 10.2 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 12.2 l/100km | 11.5 l/100km | |
|
The Jeep Grand Cherokee is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Jeep Commander consumes 0.6 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Jeep Grand Cherokee, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Jeep Commander could require 90 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Jeep Commander consumes 0.7 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Jeep Grand Cherokee. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 78 litres | 78 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 720 km in combined cycle | 760 km in combined cycle | |
| 840 km on highway | 900 km on highway | ||
| 630 km with real consumption | 670 km with real consumption | ||
| Jeep Grand Cherokee gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| 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 | |||
| 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 | 5 years | |
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.79 m | 4.75 m | |
| Width: | 1.90 m | 1.87 m | |
| Height: | 1.83 m | 1.74 m | |
|
Jeep Commander is larger. Jeep Commander is 4 cm longer than the Jeep Grand Cherokee, 3 cm wider, while the height of Jeep Commander is 9 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 212 litres | 978 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down, if possible |
1940 litres | 1909 litres | |
| Despite its longer length, 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 Jeep Commander (by 31 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.2 meters | 11.2 meters | |
| Gross weight: | 3`500 kg | 2`750 kg | |
| Net weight: | 2`245 kg | 2`135 kg | |
| Load capacity: | 1`255 kg | 615 kg | |
| Jeep Commander load capacity (permitted cargo and passenger weight) is par apmēram 51 procentiem more than Jeep Grand Cherokee. Therefore, Jeep Commander is more suitable for longer family trips or transporting heavier loads. | |||
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | no data | average | |
| Average price (€): | 8200 | 5000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Jeep Commander has
|
Jeep Grand Cherokee has
| |