2005 Jeep Cherokee vs. 2012 Suzuki Equator
To start off, 2012 Suzuki Equator is newer by 7 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 3,700 cc, 2005 Jeep Cherokee is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, both vehicles can yield 150 horse power. So under normal driving conditions, the acceleration of both vehicles should be relatively similar. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2005 Jeep Cherokee weights approximately 892 kg more than 2012 Suzuki Equator.
Because 2005 Jeep Cherokee is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2012 Suzuki Equator. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2005 Jeep Cherokee will offer significantly more control. 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, 2005 Jeep Cherokee (312 Nm @ 3800 RPM) has 141 more torque (in Nm) than 2012 Suzuki Equator. (171 Nm @ 4000 RPM). This means 2005 Jeep Cherokee will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2012 Suzuki Equator.
Compare all specifications:
2005 Jeep Cherokee | 2012 Suzuki Equator | |
Make | Jeep | Suzuki |
Model | Cherokee | Equator |
Year Released | 2005 | 2012 |
Body Type | SUV | Pickup |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 3700 cc | 2501 cc |
Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 150 HP | 150 HP |
Engine RPM | 3800 RPM | 5600 RPM |
Torque | 312 Nm | 171 Nm |
Torque RPM | 3800 RPM | 4000 RPM |
Engine Compression Ratio | 9.1:1 | 9.5:1 |
Drive Type | 4WD | Rear |
Transmission Type | Automatic | Automatic |
Number of Doors | 5 doors | 4 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 1867 kg | 975 kg |
Wheelbase Size | 2660 mm | 3200 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 70 L | 80 L |