2004 Chevrolet Colorado vs. 2010 Jeep Commander
To start off, 2010 Jeep Commander is newer by 6 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2004 Chevrolet Colorado. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2004 Chevrolet Colorado would be higher. At 5,654 cc (8 cylinders), 2010 Jeep Commander is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2010 Jeep Commander (358 HP @ 5200 RPM) has 138 more horse power than 2004 Chevrolet Colorado. (220 HP @ 5600 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2010 Jeep Commander should accelerate faster than 2004 Chevrolet Colorado. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2004 Chevrolet Colorado weights approximately 323 kg more than 2010 Jeep Commander.
Let's talk about torque, 2010 Jeep Commander (527 Nm) has 222 more torque (in Nm) than 2004 Chevrolet Colorado. (305 Nm). This means 2010 Jeep Commander will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2004 Chevrolet Colorado.
Compare all specifications:
2004 Chevrolet Colorado | 2010 Jeep Commander | |
Make | Chevrolet | Jeep |
Model | Colorado | Commander |
Year Released | 2004 | 2010 |
Body Type | Pickup | SUV |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 3458 cc | 5654 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 5 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | V |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 2 valves |
Horse Power | 220 HP | 358 HP |
Engine RPM | 5600 RPM | 5200 RPM |
Torque | 305 Nm | 527 Nm |
Engine Compression Ratio | 10.0:1 | 9.6:1 |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Number of Seats | 6 seats | 7 seats |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 5 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 1716 kg | 1393 kg |
Vehicle Length | 5270 mm | 4790 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1750 mm | 1910 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1660 mm | 1840 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 3210 mm | 2790 mm |
Fuel Consumption | 9.8 L/100km | 12.4 L/100km |
Fuel Consumption City | 12.4 L/100km | 18.1 L/100km |
Fuel Consumption Overall | 11.2 L/100km | 15.7 L/100km |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 74 L | 80 L |