Subaru B9 Tribeca 2006 vs Jeep Commander 2006
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 3.0 Petrol | 3.0 Diesel | |
| Petrol engines (Subaru B9 Tribeca) 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: | 245 HP | 218 HP | |
| Torque: | 297 NM | 510 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.7 seconds | 9 seconds | |
|
Jeep Commander is a more dynamic driving. Subaru B9 Tribeca engine produces 27 HP more power than Jeep Commander, but torque is 213 NM less than Jeep Commander. Despite the higher power, Subaru B9 Tribeca reaches 100 km/h speed 0.7 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 12.3 | 10.8 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 11.9 l/100km | 12.2 l/100km | |
|
By specification Subaru B9 Tribeca 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 Subaru B9 Tribeca could require 225 litres more fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Subaru B9 Tribeca consumes 0.3 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Jeep Commander. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 64 litres | 78 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 520 km in combined cycle | 720 km in combined cycle | |
| 620 km on highway | 840 km on highway | ||
| 530 km with real consumption | 630 km with real consumption | ||
| Jeep Commander 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 | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 440'000 km | 440'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 6 years | 5 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Subaru Outback, Subaru Legacy | 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. | |||
| 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: | 4.86 m | 4.79 m | |
| Width: | 1.88 m | 1.90 m | |
| Height: | 1.69 m | 1.83 m | |
| Subaru B9 Tribeca is 7 cm longer than the Jeep Commander, 2 cm narrower, while the height of Subaru B9 Tribeca is 14 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 450 litres | 212 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1940 litres | |
|
Subaru B9 Tribeca has more luggage capacity. Subaru B9 Tribeca has 238 litres more trunk space than the Jeep Commander. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.4 meters | 11.2 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Subaru B9 Tribeca is 0.2 metres more than that of the Jeep Commander. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`000 | 3`500 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 3600 | 8200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Subaru B9 Tribeca has
|
Jeep Commander has
| |