2005 Jeep Cherokee vs. 2006 Land Rover LR3
To start off, 2006 Land Rover LR3 is newer by 1 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2005 Jeep Cherokee. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2005 Jeep Cherokee would be higher. At 4,015 cc (6 cylinders), 2006 Land Rover LR3 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2006 Land Rover LR3 (216 HP @ 4500 RPM) has 72 more horse power than 2005 Jeep Cherokee. (144 HP @ 5200 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2006 Land Rover LR3 should accelerate faster than 2005 Jeep Cherokee.
Both vehicles are four wheel drive (4WD) - it offers better handling, traction, and control in all driving conditions compared with front wheel drive or rear wheel drive vehicles. With that said, do keep in mind that many other factors such as speed and the wear on your tires can also have significant impact on traction and control. Let's talk about torque, 2006 Land Rover LR3 (365 Nm @ 3000 RPM) has 22 more torque (in Nm) than 2005 Jeep Cherokee. (343 Nm @ 2000 RPM). This means 2006 Land Rover LR3 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2005 Jeep Cherokee.
Compare all specifications:
| 2005 Jeep Cherokee | 2006 Land Rover LR3 | |
| Make | Jeep | Land Rover |
| Model | Cherokee | LR3 |
| Year Released | 2005 | 2006 |
| Body Type | SUV | SUV |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2429 cc | 4015 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Horse Power | 144 HP | 216 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5200 RPM | 4500 RPM |
| Torque | 343 Nm | 365 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 2000 RPM | 3000 RPM |
| Drive Type | 4WD | 4WD |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 5 doors | 5 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 4500 mm | 4860 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1830 mm | 1920 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1870 mm | 1900 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2660 mm | 2890 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 11.1 L/100km | 14.7 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 70 L | 86 L |
