2004 Nissan X-Trail vs. 2003 Jeep Grand Cherokee
To start off, 2004 Nissan X-Trail is newer by 1 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2003 Jeep Grand Cherokee. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2003 Jeep Grand Cherokee would be higher. At 3,966 cc (6 cylinders), 2003 Jeep Grand Cherokee is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2003 Jeep Grand Cherokee (195 HP @ 3800 RPM) has 18 more horse power than 2004 Nissan X-Trail. (177 HP @ 6000 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2003 Jeep Grand Cherokee should accelerate faster than 2004 Nissan X-Trail. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2003 Jeep Grand Cherokee weights approximately 510 kg more than 2004 Nissan X-Trail. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Let's talk about torque, 2003 Jeep Grand Cherokee (312 Nm @ 3000 RPM) has 67 more torque (in Nm) than 2004 Nissan X-Trail. (245 Nm @ 4000 RPM). This means 2003 Jeep Grand Cherokee will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2004 Nissan X-Trail.
Compare all specifications:
| 2004 Nissan X-Trail | 2003 Jeep Grand Cherokee | |
| Make | Nissan | Jeep |
| Model | X-Trail | Grand Cherokee |
| Year Released | 2004 | 2003 |
| Body Type | SUV | SUV |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2488 cc | 3966 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 2 valves |
| Horse Power | 177 HP | 195 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6000 RPM | 3800 RPM |
| Torque | 245 Nm | 312 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 4000 RPM | 3000 RPM |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 9.5:1 | 8.8:1 |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 5 doors | 5 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1290 kg | 1800 kg |
| Wheelbase Size | 2810 mm | 2700 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 60 L | 78 L |
