Volvo XC90 2006 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: | 185 HP | 218 HP | |
| Torque: | 400 NM | 510 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12 seconds | 9 seconds | |
|
Jeep Commander is a more dynamic driving. Volvo XC90 engine produces 33 HP less power than Jeep Commander, whereas torque is 110 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): | 8.5 | 10.8 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 10.1 l/100km | 12.2 l/100km | |
|
The Volvo XC90 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Volvo XC90 consumes 2.3 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 345 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Volvo XC90 consumes 2.1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Jeep Commander. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 68 litres | 78 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 800 km in combined cycle | 720 km in combined cycle | |
| 970 km on highway | 840 km on highway | ||
| 670 km with real consumption | 630 km with real consumption | ||
| Volvo XC90 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 480'000 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 5 other car models, including Volvo V70, Volvo S80, Volvo S60, Volvo XC70, Volvo XC60 | 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. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.81 m | 4.79 m | |
| Width: | 1.90 m | 1.90 m | |
| Height: | 1.78 m | 1.83 m | |
| Volvo XC90 is 2 cm longer than the Jeep Commander, width is practically the same , while the height of Volvo XC90 is 5 cm lower. | |||
| Seats: | 7 seats | no data | |
| Trunk capacity: | 249 litres | 212 litres | |
| Trunk capacity with 7 seats: | 249 litres | no data | |
| Trunk capacity with 5 seats: | 613 litres | 212 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1837 litres | 1940 litres | |
| In 5-seat version Volvo XC90 has more luggage space (by 401 litres). The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Jeep Commander (by 103 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 12.5 meters | 11.2 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Volvo XC90 is 1.3 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`750 | 3`500 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | low | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 9000 | 9200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Volvo XC90 has
|
Jeep Commander has
| |