2008 Jeep Grand Cherokee vs. 2009 Land Rover LR2
To start off, 2009 Land Rover LR2 is newer by 1 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2008 Jeep Grand Cherokee. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2008 Jeep Grand Cherokee would be higher. At 4,701 cc (8 cylinders), 2008 Jeep Grand Cherokee is equipped with a bigger engine.
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, 2008 Jeep Grand Cherokee (425 Nm @ 3500 RPM) has 108 more torque (in Nm) than 2009 Land Rover LR2. (317 Nm @ 3200 RPM). This means 2008 Jeep Grand Cherokee will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2009 Land Rover LR2.
Compare all specifications:
| 2008 Jeep Grand Cherokee | 2009 Land Rover LR2 | |
| Make | Jeep | Land Rover |
| Model | Grand Cherokee | LR2 |
| Year Released | 2008 | 2009 |
| Body Type | SUV | SUV |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 4701 cc | 3192 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 0 HP | 231 HP |
| Torque | 425 Nm | 317 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 3500 RPM | 3200 RPM |
| Engine Bore Size | 93 mm | 84 mm |
| Engine Stroke Size | 86.7 mm | 96 mm |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Diesel |
| Drive Type | 4WD | 4WD |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | Automatic |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 5 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 4410 mm | 4500 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1880 mm | 1910 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1770 mm | 1750 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2700 mm | 2670 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 16.5 L/100km | 13.8 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 78 L | 70 L |
