2008 Jeep Commander vs. 2007 Jeep Grand Cherokee
To start off, 2008 Jeep Commander is newer by 1 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2007 Jeep Grand Cherokee. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2007 Jeep Grand Cherokee would be higher. At 2,987 cc, 2008 Jeep Commander is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2008 Jeep Commander weights approximately 268 kg more than 2007 Jeep Grand Cherokee.
Both vehicles are four wheel drive (4WD) - it offers better handling, traction, and control in all driving conditions compared with front wheel drive or rear wheel drive vehicles. 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, both vehicles can yield 510 Nm of torque. So under normal driving conditions, the ability to climb up hills and pull heavy equipment should be relatively similar for both vehicles.
Compare all specifications:
2008 Jeep Commander | 2007 Jeep Grand Cherokee | |
Make | Jeep | Jeep |
Model | Commander | Grand Cherokee |
Year Released | 2008 | 2007 |
Body Type | SUV | SUV |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 2987 cc | 2986 cc |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 0 HP | 215 HP |
Torque | 510 Nm | 510 Nm |
Torque RPM | 1600 RPM | 1600 RPM |
Engine Compression Ratio | 18.0:1 | 18.0:1 |
Drive Type | 4WD | 4WD |
Transmission Type | Automatic | Automatic |
Number of Seats | 7 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 5 doors | 5 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 2410 kg | 2142 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4790 mm | 4760 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1830 mm | 2160 mm |
Vehicle Height | 2270 mm | 1750 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2790 mm | 2790 mm |
Fuel Consumption Overall | 9.3 L/100km | 10.2 L/100km |