2008 Jeep Commander vs. 2012 Ford Mustang
To start off, 2012 Ford Mustang is newer by 4 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2008 Jeep Commander. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2008 Jeep Commander 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 2012 Ford Mustang. 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 2012 Ford Mustang has manual transmission. 2012 Ford Mustang 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 | 2012 Ford Mustang | |
| Make | Jeep | Ford |
| Model | Commander | Mustang |
| Year Released | 2008 | 2012 |
| Body Type | SUV | Convertible |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 5654 cc | 3700 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 0 HP | 305 HP |
| Drive Type | 4WD | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | 6-speed manual |
| Number of Seats | 7 seats | 4 seats |
| Number of Doors | 5 doors | 2 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 4790 mm | 4778 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1910 mm | 1877 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1830 mm | 1425 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2790 mm | 2720 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Highway | 12.4 L/100km | 7.8 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 16.8 L/100km | 12.4 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 80 L | 61 L |
