Land Rover Defender 2002 vs Jeep Cherokee 2002
| Gearbox: | Manual | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.5 Diesel | 2.8 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Double-row 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: | 122 HP | 150 HP | |
| Torque: | 300 NM | 360 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 17.5 seconds | 12.6 seconds | |
|
Jeep Cherokee is a more dynamic driving. Land Rover Defender engine produces 28 HP less power than Jeep Cherokee, whereas torque is 60 NM less than Jeep Cherokee. Due to the lower power, Land Rover Defender reaches 100 km/h speed 4.9 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 10.1 | 9.9 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 10.8 l/100km | 10.9 l/100km | |
|
By specification Land Rover Defender consumes 0.2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Jeep Cherokee, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Land Rover Defender could require 30 litres more fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Land Rover Defender consumes 0.1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Jeep Cherokee. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 70 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 590 km in combined cycle | 700 km in combined cycle | |
| 660 km on highway | 860 km on highway | ||
| 550 km with real consumption | 640 km with real consumption | ||
| Jeep Cherokee 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: | 560'000 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 Land Rover Defender engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 5 years | 7 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Land Rover Discovery | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Chrysler Grand Voyager, Chrysler Voyager | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Jeep Cherokee might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The Jeep Cherokee 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: | 3.88 m | 4.44 m | |
| Width: | 1.79 m | 1.82 m | |
| Height: | 2.08 m | 1.87 m | |
|
Land Rover Defender is smaller, but higher. Land Rover Defender is 56 cm shorter than the Jeep Cherokee, 3 cm narrower, while the height of Land Rover Defender is 21 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | 820 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1950 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 12.3 meters | 10.9 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Land Rover Defender is 1.4 metres more than that of the Jeep Cherokee, which means Land Rover Defender can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 3`500 | 2`540 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 8800 | 3600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Land Rover Defender has
|
Jeep Cherokee has
| |