Toyota Land Cruiser 1995 vs Jeep Cherokee 1995
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 4.2 Diesel | 2.5 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing chain | |
| Timing belt usually needs to be replaced more often than the chain, but it is usually significantly cheaper. Timing belt motors are generally quieter and less vibrating than chain motors. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 170 HP | 116 HP | |
| Torque: | 380 NM | 262 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12.7 seconds | 12.3 seconds | |
| Toyota Land Cruiser engine produces 54 HP more power than Jeep Cherokee, whereas torque is 118 NM more than Jeep Cherokee. Despite the higher power, Toyota Land Cruiser reaches 100 km/h speed 0.4 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 11.2 | 9.1 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 12.6 l/100km | 9.6 l/100km | |
|
The Jeep Cherokee is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Toyota Land Cruiser consumes 2.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Jeep Cherokee, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Toyota Land Cruiser could require 315 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Toyota Land Cruiser consumes 3 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Jeep Cherokee. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 95 litres | 76 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 840 km in combined cycle | 830 km in combined cycle | |
| 750 km with real consumption | 790 km with real consumption | ||
| 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: | 630'000 km | 350'000 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 Toyota Land Cruiser engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 4 years | 10 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Jeep Grand Cherokee, 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: | 4.84 m | 4.24 m | |
| Width: | 1.93 m | 1.79 m | |
| Height: | 1.91 m | 1.62 m | |
|
Toyota Land Cruiser is larger. Toyota Land Cruiser is 60 cm longer than the Jeep Cherokee, 14 cm wider, while the height of Toyota Land Cruiser is 29 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 832 litres | no data | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1368 litres | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 12 meters | 10.9 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Toyota Land Cruiser is 1.1 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): | 3`060 | 2`500 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 11 400 | 5200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Toyota Land Cruiser has
|
Jeep Cherokee has
| |