Volvo XC90 2002 vs Jeep Commander 2006
Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
---|---|---|---|
Engine: | 2.4 Diesel | 3.0 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: | 163 HP | 218 HP | |
Torque: | 340 NM | 510 NM | |
Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12 seconds | 9 seconds | |
Jeep Commander is a more dynamic driving. Volvo XC90 engine produces 55 HP less power than Jeep Commander, whereas torque is 170 NM less than Jeep Commander. Due to the lower power, Volvo XC90 reaches 100 km/h speed 3 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 9.1 | 10.8 | |
Real fuel consumption: | 9.3 l/100km | 12.2 l/100km | |
The Volvo XC90 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Volvo XC90 consumes 1.7 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Jeep Commander, which means that by driving the Volvo XC90 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 255 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Volvo XC90 consumes 2.9 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Jeep Commander. | |||
Fuel tank capacity: | 70 litres | 78 litres | |
Full fuel tank distance: | 760 km in combined cycle | 720 km in combined cycle | |
930 km on highway | 840 km on highway | ||
750 km with real consumption | 630 km with real consumption | ||
Volvo XC90 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) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
Engines | |||
Average engine lifespan: | 560'000 km | 440'000 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 Volvo XC90 engine could be longer. | |||
Engine production duration: | 5 years | 5 years | |
Engine spread: | Installed on at least 6 other car models, including Volvo V70, Volvo S80, Volvo S60, Volvo XC70, Volvo C30 | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Jeep Grand Cherokee, Chrysler 300C | |
In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Volvo XC90 might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Volvo XC90 2002 2.4 engine: These diesel engines are frequently affected by intake manifold swirl flap seizures. This issue often leads to airflow disruptions and rough engine operation.
The actuator for the turbocharger, which relies ... More about Volvo XC90 2002 2.4 engine Jeep Commander 2006 3.0 engine: The main issues with this diesel engine stem from the fuel system and its sensitive piezo injectors. These injectors are known for being highly demanding in terms of fuel quality, which can lead to performance ... More about Jeep Commander 2006 3.0 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
Length: | 4.80 m | 4.79 m | |
Width: | 1.90 m | 1.90 m | |
Height: | 1.74 m | 1.83 m | |
Volvo XC90 is 1 cm longer than the Jeep Commander, width is practically the same , while the height of Volvo XC90 is 9 cm lower. | |||
Trunk capacity: | 249 litres | 212 litres | |
Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
2404 litres | 1940 litres | |
Volvo XC90 has more luggage capacity. Volvo XC90 has 37 litres more trunk space than the Jeep Commander. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Volvo XC90 (by 464 litres). | |||
Turning diameter: | 12.7 meters | 11.2 meters | |
The turning circle of the Volvo XC90 is 1.5 metres more than that of the Jeep Commander, which means Volvo XC90 can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
Gross weight (kg): | 2`735 | 3`500 | |
Safety: | no data | ||
Quality: | low | no data | |
Average price (€): | 3800 | 9000 | |
Pros and Cons: |
Volvo XC90 has
|
Jeep Commander has
| |