Mitsubishi Pajero 1991 vs Jeep Grand Cherokee 2001
| Gearbox: | Manual | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.5 Diesel | 2.7 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: | 99 HP | 163 HP | |
| Torque: | 240 NM | 400 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 16.4 seconds | 11.2 seconds | |
|
Jeep Grand Cherokee is a more dynamic driving. Mitsubishi Pajero engine produces 64 HP less power than Jeep Grand Cherokee, whereas torque is 160 NM less than Jeep Grand Cherokee. Due to the lower power, Mitsubishi Pajero reaches 100 km/h speed 5.2 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 11.4 | 9.7 | |
|
The Jeep Grand Cherokee is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Mitsubishi Pajero consumes 1.7 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Jeep Grand Cherokee, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mitsubishi Pajero could require 255 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 75 litres | 78 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 650 km in combined cycle | 800 km in combined cycle | |
| Jeep Grand Cherokee gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 30 years | 3 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Mitsubishi L 200 | 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. Mitsubishi Pajero might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The Jeep Grand 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: | 4.70 m | 4.61 m | |
| Width: | 1.70 m | 1.84 m | |
| Height: | 1.86 m | 1.84 m | |
| Mitsubishi Pajero is 9 cm longer than the Jeep Grand Cherokee, 14 cm narrower, while the height of Mitsubishi Pajero is 2 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | 1104 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 2047 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 11.8 meters | 11.9 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mitsubishi Pajero is 0.1 metres less than that of the Jeep Grand Cherokee. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 3`300 | 2`506 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | Jeep Grand Cherokee has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Mitsubishi Pajero has serious deffects in 105 percent more cases than Jeep Grand Cherokee, so Jeep Grand Cherokee quality is probably significantly better | ||
| Average price (€): | 3800 | 3800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mitsubishi Pajero has
|
Jeep Grand Cherokee has
| |