Jeep Wrangler 2002 vs Mercedes ML 2001
| Gearbox: | Manual | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.4 Petrol | 2.7 Diesel | |
| Petrol engines (Jeep Wrangler) are generally quieter, smoother, and better suited for short trips due to quicker warm-up times. Diesel (Mercedes ML) engines, on the other hand, offer superior fuel efficiency and torque, making them ideal for long-distance driving and heavy loads. Read more: Petrol vs. Diesel: Fuel Economy and Key Differences. | |||
| 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 | 163 HP | |
| Torque: | 215 NM | 400 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.9 seconds | 11.7 seconds | |
|
Mercedes ML is a more dynamic driving. Jeep Wrangler engine produces 20 HP less power than Mercedes ML, whereas torque is 185 NM less than Mercedes ML. Due to the lower power, Jeep Wrangler reaches 100 km/h speed 0.2 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 10.4 | 9.5 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 12.4 l/100km | 10.6 l/100km | |
|
The Mercedes ML is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Jeep Wrangler consumes 0.9 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mercedes ML, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Jeep Wrangler could require 135 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Jeep Wrangler consumes 1.8 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mercedes ML. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 76 litres | 83 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 730 km in combined cycle | 870 km in combined cycle | |
| 910 km on highway | 1030 km on highway | ||
| 610 km with real consumption | 780 km with real consumption | ||
| Mercedes ML 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 | |||
| Engine production duration: | 15 years | 8 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 4 other car models, including Mercedes C klase, Mercedes E klase, Mercedes G klase | |
| 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 | 4.64 m | |
| Width: | 1.68 m | 1.84 m | |
| Height: | 1.78 m | 1.82 m | |
|
Jeep Wrangler is smaller. Jeep Wrangler is 69 cm shorter than the Mercedes ML, 16 cm narrower, while the height of Jeep Wrangler is 4 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 320 litres | no data | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1045 litres | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.2 meters | 11.9 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Jeep Wrangler is 1.7 metres less than that of the Mercedes ML, which means Jeep Wrangler can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`000 | 3`500 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | low | |
| Average price (€): | 9000 | 3200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Jeep Wrangler has
|
Mercedes ML has
| |