Jeep Wrangler 2017 vs Jeep Grand Cherokee 2005
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 3.0 Diesel | 3.0 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 260 HP | 218 HP | |
| Torque: | 600 NM | 510 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | n/a seconds | 9 seconds | |
| Jeep Wrangler engine produces 42 HP more power than Jeep Grand Cherokee, whereas torque is 90 NM more than Jeep Grand Cherokee. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 9.4 | 10.2 | |
|
The Jeep Wrangler is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Jeep Wrangler consumes 0.8 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Jeep Grand Cherokee, which means that by driving the Jeep Wrangler over 15,000 km in a year you can save 120 litres of fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 69 litres | 78 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 730 km in combined cycle | 760 km in combined cycle | |
| 850 km on highway | 900 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 | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 350'000 km | 440'000 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 Grand Cherokee engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 7 years | 5 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Chrysler 300C, Jeep Commander | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Jeep Grand Cherokee might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Jeep Grand Cherokee 2005 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 Grand Cherokee 2005 3.0 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.79 m | 4.75 m | |
| Width: | 1.88 m | 1.87 m | |
| Height: | 1.87 m | 1.74 m | |
|
Jeep Wrangler is larger. Jeep Wrangler is 4 cm longer than the Jeep Grand Cherokee, width is practically the same , while the height of Jeep Wrangler is 13 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 548 litres | 978 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down, if possible |
1059 litres | 1909 litres | |
|
Jeep Grand Cherokee has more luggage space. Despite its longer length, This could mean that the Jeep Wrangler 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 Grand Cherokee (by 850 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 12 meters | 11.2 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Jeep Wrangler is 0.8 metres more than that of the Jeep Grand Cherokee, which means Jeep Wrangler can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Power steering: | Electric power steering | Hydraulic power steering | |
| Electric power steering is simpler, quieter, more fuel-efficient, more configurable and provides additional features such as auto-steering for lane assist and parking. The disadvantages of electric power steering are possible overheating under prolonged load conditions and insufficient feedback (feeling) during steering. | |||
| Gross weight: | 2`626 kg | 2`750 kg | |
| Net weight: | 2`111 kg | 2`135 kg | |
| Load capacity: | 515 kg | 615 kg | |
| Jeep Wrangler load capacity (permitted cargo and passenger weight) is par apmēram 19 procentiem less than Jeep Grand Cherokee. Therefore, Jeep Grand Cherokee is more suitable for longer family trips or transporting heavier loads. | |||
| Safety: | |||
| Quality: | no data | average | |
| Average price (€): | 36 800 | 5000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Jeep Wrangler has
|
Jeep Grand Cherokee has
| |