1982 Holden Commodore vs. 2004 Jeep Grand Cherokee
To start off, 2004 Jeep Grand Cherokee is newer by 22 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1982 Holden Commodore. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1982 Holden Commodore would be higher. At 3,966 cc (6 cylinders), 2004 Jeep Grand Cherokee is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2004 Jeep Grand Cherokee (195 HP @ 3800 RPM) has 117 more horse power than 1982 Holden Commodore. (78 HP @ 4600 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2004 Jeep Grand Cherokee should accelerate faster than 1982 Holden Commodore. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2004 Jeep Grand Cherokee weights approximately 640 kg more than 1982 Holden Commodore. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Let's talk about torque, 2004 Jeep Grand Cherokee (312 Nm @ 3000 RPM) has 172 more torque (in Nm) than 1982 Holden Commodore. (140 Nm @ 2400 RPM). This means 2004 Jeep Grand Cherokee will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1982 Holden Commodore.
Compare all specifications:
1982 Holden Commodore | 2004 Jeep Grand Cherokee | |
Make | Holden | Jeep |
Model | Commodore | Grand Cherokee |
Year Released | 1982 | 2004 |
Body Type | Sedan | SUV |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1892 cc | 3966 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 78 HP | 195 HP |
Engine RPM | 4600 RPM | 3800 RPM |
Torque | 140 Nm | 312 Nm |
Torque RPM | 2400 RPM | 3000 RPM |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 5 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 1160 kg | 1800 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4710 mm | 4610 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1730 mm | 1840 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1370 mm | 1770 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2670 mm | 2700 mm |