2005 Jeep Cherokee vs. 2013 Rolls-Royce Phantom
To start off, 2013 Rolls-Royce Phantom is newer by 8 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. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2013 Rolls-Royce Phantom weights approximately 782 kg more than 2005 Jeep Cherokee.
Because 2005 Jeep Cherokee is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2013 Rolls-Royce Phantom. 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, 2013 Rolls-Royce Phantom (720 Nm @ 3500 RPM) has 408 more torque (in Nm) than 2005 Jeep Cherokee. (312 Nm @ 3800 RPM). This means 2013 Rolls-Royce Phantom will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2005 Jeep Cherokee.
Compare all specifications:
2005 Jeep Cherokee | 2013 Rolls-Royce Phantom | |
Make | Jeep | Rolls-Royce |
Model | Cherokee | Phantom |
Year Released | 2005 | 2013 |
Body Type | SUV | Sedan |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Horse Power | 150 HP | 0 HP |
Engine RPM | 3800 RPM | 5350 RPM |
Torque | 312 Nm | 720 Nm |
Torque RPM | 3800 RPM | 3500 RPM |
Engine Bore Size | 93 mm | 92 mm |
Engine Stroke Size | 91 mm | 84 mm |
Drive Type | 4WD | Rear |
Transmission Type | Automatic | 8-speed automatic |
Number of Doors | 5 doors | 4 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 1867 kg | 2649 kg |
Wheelbase Size | 2660 mm | 3570 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 70 L | 100 L |