2002 Chevrolet Tracker vs. 2004 Jeep Grand Cherokee
To start off, 2004 Jeep Grand Cherokee is newer by 2 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2002 Chevrolet Tracker. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2002 Chevrolet Tracker 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 98 more horse power than 2002 Chevrolet Tracker. (97 HP @ 5200 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2004 Jeep Grand Cherokee should accelerate faster than 2002 Chevrolet Tracker.
Let's talk about torque, 2004 Jeep Grand Cherokee (312 Nm @ 3000 RPM) has 173 more torque (in Nm) than 2002 Chevrolet Tracker. (139 Nm @ 4000 RPM). This means 2004 Jeep Grand Cherokee will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2002 Chevrolet Tracker.
Compare all specifications:
| 2002 Chevrolet Tracker | 2004 Jeep Grand Cherokee | |
| Make | Chevrolet | Jeep |
| Model | Tracker | Grand Cherokee |
| Year Released | 2002 | 2004 |
| Body Type | SUV | SUV |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1590 cc | 3966 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 2 valves |
| Horse Power | 97 HP | 195 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5200 RPM | 3800 RPM |
| Torque | 139 Nm | 312 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 4000 RPM | 3000 RPM |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Vehicle Length | 3860 mm | 4610 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1720 mm | 1840 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1700 mm | 1770 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2210 mm | 2700 mm |
