Jeep Grand Cherokee 1994 vs Mitsubishi Pajero 1997
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 4.0 Petrol | 3.5 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: | 188 HP | 208 HP | |
| Torque: | 298 NM | 300 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | n/a seconds | 13.1 seconds | |
| Jeep Grand Cherokee engine produces 20 HP less power than Mitsubishi Pajero, whereas torque is 2 NM less than Mitsubishi Pajero. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 13.1 | 14.3 | |
|
The Jeep Grand Cherokee is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Jeep Grand Cherokee consumes 1.2 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi Pajero, which means that by driving the Jeep Grand Cherokee over 15,000 km in a year you can save 180 litres of fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 87 litres | 92 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 660 km in combined cycle | 640 km in combined cycle | |
| 770 km on highway | 790 km on highway | ||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 20 years | 29 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Jeep 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 Grand Cherokee 1994 4.0 engine: A robust engine with great resource, but also high fuel consumption. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.50 m | 4.72 m | |
| Width: | 1.76 m | 1.78 m | |
| Height: | 1.65 m | 1.90 m | |
|
Jeep Grand Cherokee is smaller. Jeep Grand Cherokee is 22 cm shorter than the Mitsubishi Pajero, 2 cm narrower, while the height of Jeep Grand Cherokee is 25 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 11 meters | 11.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Jeep Grand Cherokee is 0.8 metres less than that of the Mitsubishi Pajero, which means Jeep Grand Cherokee can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | no data | 3`300 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | below average | average | |
| Mitsubishi Pajero has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Jeep Grand Cherokee has serious deffects in 130 percent more cases than Mitsubishi Pajero, so Mitsubishi Pajero quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 4800 | 2800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Jeep Grand Cherokee has
|
Mitsubishi Pajero has
| |