2004 Jeep Grand Cherokee vs. 2010 Nissan Titan
To start off, 2010 Nissan Titan is newer by 6 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2004 Jeep Grand Cherokee. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2004 Jeep Grand Cherokee would be higher. At 5,551 cc (8 cylinders), 2010 Nissan Titan is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2010 Nissan Titan (317 HP @ 5200 RPM) has 122 more horse power than 2004 Jeep Grand Cherokee. (195 HP @ 3800 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2010 Nissan Titan should accelerate faster than 2004 Jeep Grand Cherokee.
Let's talk about torque, 2010 Nissan Titan (522 Nm @ 3400 RPM) has 210 more torque (in Nm) than 2004 Jeep Grand Cherokee. (312 Nm @ 3000 RPM). This means 2010 Nissan Titan will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2004 Jeep Grand Cherokee.
Compare all specifications:
2004 Jeep Grand Cherokee | 2010 Nissan Titan | |
Make | Jeep | Nissan |
Model | Grand Cherokee | Titan |
Year Released | 2004 | 2010 |
Body Type | SUV | Pickup |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 3966 cc | 5551 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | V |
Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 195 HP | 317 HP |
Engine RPM | 3800 RPM | 5200 RPM |
Torque | 312 Nm | 522 Nm |
Torque RPM | 3000 RPM | 3400 RPM |
Engine Compression Ratio | 8.8:1 | 9.8:1 |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 6 seats |
Number of Doors | 5 doors | 2 doors |
Vehicle Length | 4610 mm | 5710 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1840 mm | 2030 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1770 mm | 1900 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2700 mm | 3560 mm |
Fuel Consumption | 11.2 L/100km | 13.8 L/100km |
Fuel Consumption City | 14.7 L/100km | 18.1 L/100km |
Fuel Consumption Overall | 13.1 L/100km | 16.8 L/100km |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 78 L | 106 L |