2004 Nissan Armada 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 Nissan Armada. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2004 Nissan Armada 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 53 more horse power than 2004 Nissan Armada. (305 HP @ 3600 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2010 Jeep Commander should accelerate faster than 2004 Nissan Armada. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2004 Nissan Armada weights approximately 881 kg more than 2010 Jeep Commander.
Let's talk about torque, 2010 Jeep Commander (527 Nm) has 5 more torque (in Nm) than 2004 Nissan Armada. (522 Nm). This means 2010 Jeep Commander will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2004 Nissan Armada.
Compare all specifications:
2004 Nissan Armada | 2010 Jeep Commander | |
Make | Nissan | Jeep |
Model | Armada | Commander |
Year Released | 2004 | 2010 |
Body Type | SUV | SUV |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 5556 cc | 5654 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | V |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 2 valves |
Horse Power | 305 HP | 358 HP |
Engine RPM | 3600 RPM | 5200 RPM |
Torque | 522 Nm | 527 Nm |
Engine Compression Ratio | 9.8:1 | 9.6:1 |
Number of Seats | 8 seats | 7 seats |
Number of Doors | 5 doors | 5 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 2274 kg | 1393 kg |
Vehicle Length | 5260 mm | 4790 mm |
Vehicle Width | 2010 mm | 1910 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1980 mm | 1840 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 3140 mm | 2790 mm |
Fuel Consumption | 12.4 L/100km | 12.4 L/100km |
Fuel Consumption City | 18.1 L/100km | 18.1 L/100km |
Fuel Consumption Overall | 14.7 L/100km | 15.7 L/100km |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 106 L | 80 L |