Jeep Wrangler 2002 vs BMW X5 2001
| Gearbox: | Manual | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.4 Petrol | 2.9 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing chain | |
| Timing belt usually needs to be replaced more often than the chain, but it is usually significantly cheaper. Timing belt motors are generally quieter and less vibrating than chain motors. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 143 HP | 184 HP | |
| Torque: | 215 NM | 410 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.9 seconds | 10 seconds | |
|
BMW X5 is a more dynamic driving. Jeep Wrangler engine produces 41 HP less power than BMW X5, whereas torque is 195 NM less than BMW X5. Due to the lower power, Jeep Wrangler reaches 100 km/h speed 1.9 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 10.4 | 9.6 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 12.4 l/100km | 9.9 l/100km | |
|
The BMW X5 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Jeep Wrangler consumes 0.8 litres more fuel per 100 km than the BMW X5, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Jeep Wrangler could require 120 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Jeep Wrangler consumes 2.5 litres more fuel per 100 km than the BMW X5. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 76 litres | 93 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 730 km in combined cycle | 960 km in combined cycle | |
| 910 km on highway | 1140 km on highway | ||
| 610 km with real consumption | 930 km with real consumption | ||
| BMW X5 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
| Ground clearance: | 215 mm (8.5 inches) | 187 mm (7.4 inches) | |
| Because of the higher ground clearance, Jeep Wrangler can perform better on bad roads - it can go over higher obstacles and bumps. At the same time, the higher ground clearance can reduce stability and handling on paved roads, especially at higher speeds. | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 15 years | 12 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 7 other car models, including Chrysler Grand Voyager, Chrysler Voyager, Jeep Cherokee, Dodge Grand Caravan | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including BMW 5 sērija, BMW 3 sērija, BMW 7 sērija | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Jeep Wrangler might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Jeep Wrangler 2002 2.4 engine: This engine features a thin-walled cast-iron cylinder block, an aluminum cylinder head with dual overhead camshafts, a timing belt system, two balance shafts, hydraulic lifters, a dual-mass flywheel, and a dampened crankshaft pulley. It has received numerous ... More about Jeep Wrangler 2002 2.4 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 3.95 m | 4.67 m | |
| Width: | 1.68 m | 1.87 m | |
| Height: | 1.78 m | 1.72 m | |
|
Jeep Wrangler is smaller, but higher. Jeep Wrangler is 72 cm shorter than the BMW X5, 19 cm narrower, while the height of Jeep Wrangler is 6 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 320 litres | 465 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1045 litres | 1550 litres | |
|
BMW X5 has more luggage space. Jeep Wrangler has 145 litres less trunk space than the BMW X5. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in BMW X5 (by 505 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.2 meters | 12 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Jeep Wrangler is 1.8 metres less than that of the BMW X5, which means Jeep Wrangler can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`000 | 2`685 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | below average | |
| Average price (€): | 9400 | 3400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Jeep Wrangler has
|
BMW X5 has
| |