2005 Mercury Mountaineer vs. 2010 Jeep Commander
To start off, 2010 Jeep Commander is newer by 5 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2005 Mercury Mountaineer. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2005 Mercury Mountaineer would be higher. At 4,013 cc (6 cylinders), 2005 Mercury Mountaineer is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, both vehicles can yield 210 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. 2010 Jeep Commander weights approximately 126 kg more than 2005 Mercury Mountaineer.
Let's talk about torque, 2005 Mercury Mountaineer (344 Nm) has 25 more torque (in Nm) than 2010 Jeep Commander. (319 Nm). This means 2005 Mercury Mountaineer will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2010 Jeep Commander.
Compare all specifications:
2005 Mercury Mountaineer | 2010 Jeep Commander | |
Make | Mercury | Jeep |
Model | Mountaineer | Commander |
Year Released | 2005 | 2010 |
Body Type | SUV | SUV |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 4013 cc | 3701 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | V |
Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 2 valves |
Horse Power | 210 HP | 210 HP |
Torque | 344 Nm | 319 Nm |
Engine Compression Ratio | 9.7:1 | 9.6:1 |
Number of Seats | 7 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 5 doors | 5 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 1917 kg | 2043 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4860 mm | 4790 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1840 mm | 1910 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1850 mm | 1840 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2900 mm | 2790 mm |
Fuel Consumption | 11.2 L/100km | 12.5 L/100km |
Fuel Consumption City | 14.7 L/100km | 17 L/100km |
Fuel Consumption Overall | 13.1 L/100km | 14.9 L/100km |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 85 L | 80 L |