1996 Holden XU 6 vs. 2005 Jeep Grand Cherokee
To start off, 2005 Jeep Grand Cherokee is newer by 9 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1996 Holden XU 6. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1996 Holden XU 6 would be higher.
Because 2005 Jeep Grand Cherokee is rear wheel drive (RWD), it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, it will be much easier to do with 2005 Jeep Grand Cherokee. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1996 Holden XU 6, being front wheel drive (FWD), will offer much better control with better grip. 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, 1996 Holden XU 6 (515 Nm) has 196 more torque (in Nm) than 2005 Jeep Grand Cherokee. (319 Nm). This means 1996 Holden XU 6 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2005 Jeep Grand Cherokee.
Compare all specifications:
1996 Holden XU 6 | 2005 Jeep Grand Cherokee | |
Make | Holden | Jeep |
Model | XU 6 | Grand Cherokee |
Year Released | 1996 | 2005 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | V |
Horse Power | 0 HP | 210 HP |
Torque | 515 Nm | 319 Nm |
Drive Type | Front | Rear |