Toyota Land Cruiser 2009 vs Jeep Cherokee 2008
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 3.0 Diesel | 2.8 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 173 HP | 177 HP | |
| Torque: | 410 NM | 460 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.7 seconds | 10.5 seconds | |
|
Jeep Cherokee is a more dynamic driving. Toyota Land Cruiser engine produces 4 HP less power than Jeep Cherokee, whereas torque is 50 NM less than Jeep Cherokee. Due to the lower power, Toyota Land Cruiser reaches 100 km/h speed 1.2 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.1 | 9.4 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 11.8 l/100km | 10.8 l/100km | |
|
By specification Toyota Land Cruiser consumes 1.3 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Jeep Cherokee, which means that by driving the Toyota Land Cruiser over 15,000 km in a year you can save 195 litres of fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Toyota Land Cruiser consumes 1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Jeep Cherokee. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 87 litres | 70 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1070 km in combined cycle | 740 km in combined cycle | |
| 1290 km on highway | 890 km on highway | ||
| 730 km with real consumption | 640 km with real consumption | ||
| Toyota Land Cruiser 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: | 420'000 km | 420'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 25 years | 12 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Toyota Hilux | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Chrysler Grand Voyager, Jeep Wrangler, Dodge Nitro | |
| 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 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. | |||
| Toyota Land Cruiser 2009 3.0 engine: The engine tends to be noisy and vibrate.
Nozzle life is limited when using poor quality fuel.
Increased oil consumption tends to occur over time. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.76 m | 4.49 m | |
| Width: | 1.89 m | 1.84 m | |
| Height: | 1.89 m | 1.74 m | |
|
Toyota Land Cruiser is larger. Toyota Land Cruiser is 27 cm longer than the Jeep Cherokee, 5 cm wider, while the height of Toyota Land Cruiser is 15 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 104 litres | 878 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1930 litres | no data | |
|
Jeep Cherokee has more luggage space. Despite its longer length, Toyota Land Cruiser has 774 litres less trunk space than the Jeep Cherokee. This could mean that the Toyota Land Cruiser uses more space in the cabin, so the driver and passengers could be more spacious and comfortable. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.6 meters | 10.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Toyota Land Cruiser is 0.8 metres more than that of the Jeep Cherokee, which means Toyota Land Cruiser can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`990 | 2`520 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 18 200 | 7400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Toyota Land Cruiser has
|
Jeep Cherokee has
| |