2004 Chevrolet Blazer vs. 2009 Maybach 62
To start off, 2009 Maybach 62 is newer by 5 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2004 Chevrolet Blazer. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2004 Chevrolet Blazer would be higher. At 5,980 cc (12 cylinders), 2009 Maybach 62 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2009 Maybach 62 (605 HP @ 4800 RPM) has 415 more horse power than 2004 Chevrolet Blazer. (190 HP @ 6000 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2009 Maybach 62 should accelerate faster than 2004 Chevrolet Blazer. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2009 Maybach 62 weights approximately 971 kg more than 2004 Chevrolet Blazer. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Because 2004 Chevrolet Blazer is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2009 Maybach 62. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2004 Chevrolet Blazer 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, 2009 Maybach 62 (1,001 Nm) has 662 more torque (in Nm) than 2004 Chevrolet Blazer. (339 Nm). This means 2009 Maybach 62 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2004 Chevrolet Blazer.
Compare all specifications:
2004 Chevrolet Blazer | 2009 Maybach 62 | |
Make | Chevrolet | Maybach |
Model | Blazer | 62 |
Year Released | 2004 | 2009 |
Body Type | SUV | Sedan |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 4294 cc | 5980 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 12 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | V |
Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 3 valves |
Horse Power | 190 HP | 605 HP |
Engine RPM | 6000 RPM | 4800 RPM |
Torque | 339 Nm | 1001 Nm |
Engine Bore Size | 102 mm | 82.6 mm |
Engine Stroke Size | 88 mm | 93 mm |
Engine Compression Ratio | 9.2:1 | 9.0:1 |
Drive Type | 4WD | Rear |
Number of Seats | 4 seats | 4 seats |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 4 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 1764 kg | 2735 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4680 mm | 6170 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1730 mm | 1990 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1650 mm | 1580 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2630 mm | 3830 mm |
Fuel Consumption City | 15.7 L/100km | 21.4 L/100km |
Fuel Consumption Overall | 14.7 L/100km | 16.3 L/100km |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 71 L | 110 L |