Jeep Cherokee 1997 vs Subaru Forester 2000
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 4.0 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing belt | |
| Engine chain usually needs to be replaced less often than the timing belt, but the cost of replacing the chain is usually higher. Chain motors are considered to be more reliable, but noisier and more vibration generating. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 192 HP | 170 HP | |
| Torque: | 305 NM | 240 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | n/a seconds | 8.4 seconds | |
| Jeep Cherokee engine produces 22 HP more power than Subaru Forester, whereas torque is 65 NM more than Subaru Forester. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 11.6 | 9.9 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 17.3 l/100km | 11.4 l/100km | |
|
The Subaru Forester is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Jeep Cherokee consumes 1.7 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Subaru Forester, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Jeep Cherokee could require 255 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Jeep Cherokee consumes 5.9 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Subaru Forester. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 76 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 650 km in combined cycle | 600 km in combined cycle | |
| 710 km on highway | 730 km on highway | ||
| 430 km with real consumption | 520 km with real consumption | ||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 630'000 km | 320'000 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 Jeep Cherokee engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 20 years | 9 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Jeep Grand Cherokee, Jeep Wrangler | Used only for this car | |
| 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. | |||
| Jeep Cherokee 1997 4.0 engine: A robust engine with great resource, but also high fuel consumption. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.25 m | 4.45 m | |
| Width: | 1.76 m | 1.74 m | |
| Height: | 1.62 m | 1.58 m | |
| Jeep Cherokee is 20 cm shorter than the Subaru Forester, 2 cm wider, while the height of Jeep Cherokee is 4 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 932 litres | no data | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1954 litres | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | no data | 10.8 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`223 | 1`800 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | high | |
| Average price (€): | 3600 | 2200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Jeep Cherokee has
|
Subaru Forester has
| |