1998 Mazda 323 vs. 2012 Jeep Grand Cherokee
To start off, 2012 Jeep Grand Cherokee is newer by 14 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1998 Mazda 323. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1998 Mazda 323 would be higher. At 2,987 cc (6 cylinders), 2012 Jeep Grand Cherokee is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2012 Jeep Grand Cherokee (238 HP) has 124 more horse power than 1998 Mazda 323. (114 HP) In normal driving conditions, 2012 Jeep Grand Cherokee should accelerate faster than 1998 Mazda 323.
Because 2012 Jeep Grand Cherokee is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 1998 Mazda 323. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2012 Jeep Grand Cherokee will offer significantly more control. 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, 2012 Jeep Grand Cherokee (410 Nm) has 248 more torque (in Nm) than 1998 Mazda 323. (162 Nm). This means 2012 Jeep Grand Cherokee will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1998 Mazda 323.
Compare all specifications:
1998 Mazda 323 | 2012 Jeep Grand Cherokee | |
Make | Mazda | Jeep |
Model | 323 | Grand Cherokee |
Year Released | 1998 | 2012 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1839 cc | 2987 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | V |
Horse Power | 114 HP | 238 HP |
Torque | 162 Nm | 410 Nm |
Drive Type | Front | 4WD |
Transmission Type | Automatic | Automatic |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 5 doors | 5 doors |
Vehicle Length | 4210 mm | 4859 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1710 mm | 1958 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1420 mm | 1755 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2620 mm | 2916 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 55 L | 80 L |