2008 Jeep Commander vs. 2004 MG ZT-T
To start off, 2008 Jeep Commander is newer by 4 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2004 MG ZT-T. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2004 MG ZT-T would be higher. At 5,654 cc (8 cylinders), 2008 Jeep Commander is equipped with a bigger engine.
Because 2008 Jeep Commander is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2004 MG ZT-T. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2008 Jeep Commander 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. 2008 Jeep Commander has automatic transmission and 2004 MG ZT-T has manual transmission. 2004 MG ZT-T will offer better control over acceleration and deceleration in addition to better fuel efficiency overall. 2008 Jeep Commander will be easier to drive especially in heavy traffic.
Compare all specifications:
| 2008 Jeep Commander | 2004 MG ZT-T | |
| Make | Jeep | MG |
| Model | Commander | ZT-T |
| Year Released | 2008 | 2004 |
| Body Type | SUV | Station Wagon |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 5654 cc | 2497 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 0 HP | 187 HP |
| Drive Type | 4WD | Front |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | Manual |
| Number of Seats | 7 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 5 doors | 5 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 4790 mm | 4800 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1910 mm | 1780 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1830 mm | 1430 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2790 mm | 2830 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 15.7 L/100km | 9.9 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 80 L | 65 L |
