Mitsubishi Pajero 2003 vs Jeep Grand Cherokee 2001
| Gearbox: | Manual | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.5 Diesel | 2.7 Diesel | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 115 HP | 163 HP | |
| Torque: | 240 NM | 400 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 17.1 seconds | 11.2 seconds | |
|
Jeep Grand Cherokee is a more dynamic driving. Mitsubishi Pajero engine produces 48 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 5.9 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 10.4 | 9.7 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 10.5 l/100km | 11.0 l/100km | |
|
By specification Mitsubishi Pajero consumes 0.7 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 105 litres more fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Mitsubishi Pajero consumes 0.5 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Jeep Grand Cherokee. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 71 litres | 78 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 680 km in combined cycle | 800 km in combined cycle | |
| 790 km on highway | 960 km on highway | ||
| 670 km with real consumption | 700 km with real consumption | ||
| 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) | |
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.30 m | 4.61 m | |
| Width: | 1.88 m | 1.84 m | |
| Height: | 1.84 m | 1.84 m | |
| Mitsubishi Pajero is 31 cm shorter than the Jeep Grand Cherokee, 4 cm wider the height of the cars does not differ significantly. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | 1104 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 2047 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.6 meters | 11.9 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mitsubishi Pajero is 1.3 metres less than that of the Jeep Grand Cherokee, which means Mitsubishi Pajero can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`800 | 2`506 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | above average | above average | |
| Mitsubishi Pajero has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Jeep Grand Cherokee has serious deffects in 10 percent more cases than Mitsubishi Pajero, so Mitsubishi Pajero quality is probably slightly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 4000 | 3400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mitsubishi Pajero has
|
Jeep Grand Cherokee has
| |