Jeep Cherokee 2002 vs Land Rover Discovery 1999
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.8 Diesel | 2.5 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Double-row 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: | 150 HP | 137 HP | |
| Torque: | 360 NM | 300 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12.6 seconds | 15.3 seconds | |
|
Jeep Cherokee is more dynamic to drive. Jeep Cherokee engine produces 13 HP more power than Land Rover Discovery, whereas torque is 60 NM more than Land Rover Discovery. Thanks to more power Jeep Cherokee reaches 100 km/h speed 2.7 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 9.9 | 9.4 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 10.9 l/100km | 10.3 l/100km | |
|
The Land Rover Discovery is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Jeep Cherokee consumes 0.5 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Land Rover Discovery, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Jeep Cherokee could require 75 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Jeep Cherokee consumes 0.6 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Land Rover Discovery. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 70 litres | 95 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 700 km in combined cycle | 1010 km in combined cycle | |
| 860 km on highway | 1150 km on highway | ||
| 640 km with real consumption | 920 km with real consumption | ||
| Land Rover Discovery 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) | 4x4 - Full time 4WD | |
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 440'000 km | 480'000 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 Land Rover Discovery engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 7 years | 4 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Chrysler Grand Voyager, Chrysler Voyager | Used also on Land Rover Defender | |
| 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: | yes | no | |
| 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: | 4.44 m | 4.70 m | |
| Width: | 1.82 m | 1.88 m | |
| Height: | 1.87 m | 1.94 m | |
|
Jeep Cherokee is smaller. Jeep Cherokee is 26 cm shorter than the Land Rover Discovery, 6 cm narrower, while the height of Jeep Cherokee is 7 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 820 litres | 1290 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1950 litres | 1970 litres | |
|
Land Rover Discovery has more luggage space. Jeep Cherokee has 470 litres less trunk space than the Land Rover Discovery. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Land Rover Discovery (by 20 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.9 meters | 11.9 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Jeep Cherokee is 1 metres less than that of the Land Rover Discovery, which means Jeep Cherokee can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`540 | 2`750 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 7400 | 3800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Jeep Cherokee has
|
Land Rover Discovery has
| |