2008 Jeep Cherokee vs. 2006 Rover 75
To start off, 2008 Jeep Cherokee is newer by 2 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2006 Rover 75. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2006 Rover 75 would be higher. At 4,601 cc (8 cylinders), 2006 Rover 75 is equipped with a bigger engine.
Because 2008 Jeep Cherokee is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2006 Rover 75. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2008 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, 2008 Jeep Cherokee (343 Nm @ 2000 RPM) has 98 more torque (in Nm) than 2006 Rover 75. (245 Nm @ 4000 RPM). This means 2008 Jeep Cherokee will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2006 Rover 75.
Compare all specifications:
2008 Jeep Cherokee | 2006 Rover 75 | |
Make | Jeep | Rover |
Model | Cherokee | 75 |
Year Released | 2008 | 2006 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 2499 cc | 4601 cc |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 2 valves |
Horse Power | 0 HP | 256 HP |
Torque | 343 Nm | 245 Nm |
Torque RPM | 2000 RPM | 4000 RPM |
Engine Bore Size | 92 mm | 90.2 mm |
Engine Stroke Size | 94 mm | 90 mm |
Engine Compression Ratio | 17.5:1 | 9.4:1 |
Fuel Type | Diesel | Gasoline - Premium |
Top Speed | 170 km/hour | 250 km/hour |
Acceleration 0-100mph | 13.8 seconds | 6.6 seconds |
Drive Type | 4WD | Front |
Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 5 doors | 4 doors |
Vehicle Width | 1850 mm | 1780 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2660 mm | 2750 mm |
Fuel Consumption Overall | 9 L/100km | 13.6 L/100km |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 70 L | 65 L |