2005 MCC Crossblade vs. 2003 Jeep Grand Cherokee
To start off, 2005 MCC Crossblade is newer by 2 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) has 125 more horse power than 2005 MCC Crossblade. (70 HP) In normal driving conditions, 2003 Jeep Grand Cherokee should accelerate faster than 2005 MCC Crossblade. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2003 Jeep Grand Cherokee weights approximately 1020 kg more than 2005 MCC Crossblade. 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 210 more torque (in Nm) than 2005 MCC Crossblade. (102 Nm @ 3210 RPM). This means 2003 Jeep Grand Cherokee will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2005 MCC Crossblade.
Compare all specifications:
| 2005 MCC Crossblade | 2003 Jeep Grand Cherokee | |
| Make | MCC | Jeep |
| Model | Crossblade | Grand Cherokee |
| Year Released | 2005 | 2003 |
| Engine Size | 599 cc | 3966 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 3 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 70 HP | 195 HP |
| Torque | 102 Nm | 312 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 3210 RPM | 3000 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Vehicle Weight | 744 kg | 1764 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 2630 mm | 4610 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1630 mm | 1840 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1520 mm | 1770 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 1810 mm | 2700 mm |
