Renault Kadjar 2015 vs Jeep Compass 2017
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.2 Petrol | 1.4 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 130 HP | 170 HP | |
| Torque: | 205 NM | 250 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.7 seconds | 9.3 seconds | |
|
Jeep Compass is a more dynamic driving. Renault Kadjar engine produces 40 HP less power than Jeep Compass, whereas torque is 45 NM less than Jeep Compass. Due to the lower power, Renault Kadjar reaches 100 km/h speed 1.4 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.5 | 6.9 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.9 l/100km | 9.6 l/100km | |
|
The Renault Kadjar is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Renault Kadjar consumes 1.4 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Jeep Compass, which means that by driving the Renault Kadjar over 15,000 km in a year you can save 210 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Renault Kadjar consumes 1.7 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Jeep Compass. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1090 km in combined cycle | 860 km in combined cycle | |
| 1220 km on highway | 1010 km on highway | ||
| 750 km with real consumption | 620 km with real consumption | ||
| Renault Kadjar 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: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | 4x4 - AWD (all-wheel-drive) | |
|
Jeep Compass 2017: It can have Freedom Drive I or II - an electronically controlled four-wheel drive system. Normally, the car has front-wheel drive, but if wheel slip is detected, it can automatically send up to 50% power to the rear wheels. The Freedom Drive I system is designed primarily for snow and similar conditions with limited traction. The Freedom Drive II version adds an off-road four-wheel drive mode, traction control, optimized engine and transmission performance for rock crawling, and hill descent control (not in EU editions). | |||
| Ground clearance: | 200 mm (7.9 inches) | 215 mm (8.5 inches) | |
| Because of the higher ground clearance, Jeep Compass 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. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.45 m | 4.39 m | |
| Width: | 1.84 m | 1.82 m | |
| Height: | 1.61 m | 1.64 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Renault Kadjar is 6 cm longer than the Jeep Compass, 2 cm wider, while the height of Renault Kadjar is 3 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 472 litres | 458 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1478 litres | no data | |
| Renault Kadjar has 14 litres more trunk space than the Jeep Compass. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.7 meters | 11.1 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Renault Kadjar is 0.4 metres less than that of the Jeep Compass, which means Renault Kadjar can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`903 | no data | |
| Safety: | |||
| The Renault Kadjar scores higher in active safety technologies (stability control, lane assist, automatic braking, etc.) tests. | |||
| Quality: | average | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 11 000 | 25 400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Renault Kadjar has
|
Jeep Compass has
| |