2009 Acura TL vs. 2006 Chevrolet TrailBlazer
To start off, 2009 Acura TL is newer by 3 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2006 Chevrolet TrailBlazer. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2006 Chevrolet TrailBlazer would be higher. At 4,163 cc (6 cylinders), 2006 Chevrolet TrailBlazer is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2006 Chevrolet TrailBlazer (291 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 15 more horse power than 2009 Acura TL. (276 HP @ 6200 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2006 Chevrolet TrailBlazer should accelerate faster than 2009 Acura TL.
Because 2006 Chevrolet TrailBlazer is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2009 Acura TL. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2006 Chevrolet TrailBlazer 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, 2006 Chevrolet TrailBlazer (376 Nm @ 4800 RPM) has 122 more torque (in Nm) than 2009 Acura TL. (254 Nm @ 5000 RPM). This means 2006 Chevrolet TrailBlazer will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2009 Acura TL.
Compare all specifications:
| 2009 Acura TL | 2006 Chevrolet TrailBlazer | |
| Make | Acura | Chevrolet |
| Model | TL | TrailBlazer |
| Year Released | 2009 | 2006 |
| Body Type | Sedan | SUV |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 3471 cc | 4163 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Horse Power | 276 HP | 291 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6200 RPM | 6000 RPM |
| Torque | 254 Nm | 376 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 5000 RPM | 4800 RPM |
| Drive Type | Front | 4WD |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 7 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 4970 mm | 5280 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1890 mm | 1900 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1460 mm | 1920 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2780 mm | 3280 mm |
| Fuel Consumption | 9.2 L/100km | 11.8 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 13.2 L/100km | 15.7 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 11.3 L/100km | 13.8 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 70 L | 95 L |
