2004 Dodge Dakota vs. 2005 Nissan Murano
To start off, 2005 Nissan Murano is newer by 1 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2004 Dodge Dakota. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2004 Dodge Dakota would be higher. At 3,687 cc (6 cylinders), 2004 Dodge Dakota is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2005 Nissan Murano (245 HP @ 3600 RPM) has 35 more horse power than 2004 Dodge Dakota. (210 HP @ 5600 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2005 Nissan Murano should accelerate faster than 2004 Dodge Dakota. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2005 Nissan Murano weights approximately 114 kg more than 2004 Dodge Dakota. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Let's talk about torque, 2005 Nissan Murano (334 Nm) has 15 more torque (in Nm) than 2004 Dodge Dakota. (319 Nm). This means 2005 Nissan Murano will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2004 Dodge Dakota.
Compare all specifications:
| 2004 Dodge Dakota | 2005 Nissan Murano | |
| Make | Dodge | Nissan |
| Model | Dakota | Murano |
| Year Released | 2004 | 2005 |
| Body Type | Pickup | Crossover |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 3687 cc | 3505 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 210 HP | 245 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5600 RPM | 3600 RPM |
| Torque | 319 Nm | 334 Nm |
| Engine Bore Size | 93 mm | 96 mm |
| Engine Stroke Size | 91 mm | 81 mm |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 9.1:1 | 10.3:1 |
| Number of Seats | 3 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 5 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1685 kg | 1799 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4980 mm | 4770 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1830 mm | 1890 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1680 mm | 1700 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2850 mm | 2660 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Highway | 10.8 L/100km | 9.8 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 14.9 L/100km | 11.8 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 13.2 L/100km | 10.7 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 83 L | 82 L |
