1950 Jeep CJ3A vs. 2006 Suzuki Reno
To start off, 2006 Suzuki Reno is newer by 56 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1950 Jeep CJ3A. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1950 Jeep CJ3A would be higher. At 2,199 cc (4 cylinders), 1950 Jeep CJ3A is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2006 Suzuki Reno (126 HP @ 5600 RPM) has 67 more horse power than 1950 Jeep CJ3A. (59 HP @ 3600 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2006 Suzuki Reno should accelerate faster than 1950 Jeep CJ3A. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1950 Jeep CJ3A weights approximately 45 kg more than 2006 Suzuki Reno.
Both vehicles are four wheel drive (4WD) - it offers better handling, traction, and control in all driving conditions compared with front wheel drive or rear wheel drive vehicles. With that said, do keep in mind that many other factors such as speed and the wear on your tires can also have significant impact on traction and control. Let's talk about torque, 2006 Suzuki Reno (178 Nm @ 4000 RPM) has 33 more torque (in Nm) than 1950 Jeep CJ3A. (145 Nm @ 3600 RPM). This means 2006 Suzuki Reno will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1950 Jeep CJ3A.
Compare all specifications:
| 1950 Jeep CJ3A | 2006 Suzuki Reno | |
| Make | Jeep | Suzuki |
| Model | CJ3A | Reno |
| Year Released | 1950 | 2006 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2199 cc | 1999 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 59 HP | 126 HP |
| Engine RPM | 3600 RPM | 5600 RPM |
| Torque | 145 Nm | 178 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 3600 RPM | 4000 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | 4WD | 4WD |
| Vehicle Weight | 1110 kg | 1065 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 3130 mm | 4300 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1460 mm | 1730 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1630 mm | 1450 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2040 mm | 2610 mm |
