Nissan Murano 2002 vs Jeep Commander 2006
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 3.5 Petrol | 3.0 Diesel | |
| Petrol engines (Nissan Murano) are generally quieter, smoother, and better suited for short trips due to quicker warm-up times. Diesel (Jeep Commander) 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 chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 248 HP | 218 HP | |
| Torque: | 333 NM | 510 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 8.5 seconds | 9 seconds | |
|
Nissan Murano is more dynamic to drive. Nissan Murano engine produces 30 HP more power than Jeep Commander, but torque is 177 NM less than Jeep Commander. Thanks to more power Nissan Murano reaches 100 km/h speed 0.5 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 12.3 | 10.8 | |
|
The Jeep Commander is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Nissan Murano consumes 1.5 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Jeep Commander, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Nissan Murano could require 225 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 82 litres | 78 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 660 km in combined cycle | 720 km in combined cycle | |
| 860 km on highway | 840 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 | |||
| Engine production duration: | 25 years | 5 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Infiniti FX, Nissan Pathfinder | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Jeep Grand Cherokee, Chrysler 300C | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Nissan Murano might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The Jeep Commander 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. | |||
| Jeep Commander 2006 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 Commander 2006 3.0 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.77 m | 4.79 m | |
| Width: | 1.88 m | 1.90 m | |
| Height: | 1.69 m | 1.83 m | |
|
Nissan Murano is smaller. Nissan Murano is 3 cm shorter than the Jeep Commander, 2 cm narrower, while the height of Nissan Murano is 14 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 923 litres | 212 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
2005 litres | 1940 litres | |
|
Nissan Murano has more luggage capacity. Even though the car is shorter, Nissan Murano has 711 litres more trunk space than the Jeep Commander. The Jeep Commander may have more interior space, so the cabin could be more spacious and more comfortable for the driver and passengers. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Nissan Murano (by 65 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | no data | 11.2 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`295 | 3`500 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 2400 | 8400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Nissan Murano has
|
Jeep Commander has
| |