2009 Jeep Commander vs. 2007 Mazda CX-9
To start off, 2009 Jeep Commander is newer by 2 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2007 Mazda CX-9. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2007 Mazda CX-9 would be higher. At 4,701 cc (8 cylinders), 2009 Jeep Commander is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2009 Jeep Commander (305 HP @ 5650 RPM) has 42 more horse power than 2007 Mazda CX-9. (263 HP @ 6250 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2009 Jeep Commander should accelerate faster than 2007 Mazda CX-9.
Because 2009 Jeep Commander is rear wheel drive (RWD), it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, it will be much easier to do with 2009 Jeep Commander. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2007 Mazda CX-9, being front wheel drive (FWD), will offer much better control with better grip. 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, 2009 Jeep Commander (453 Nm @ 3950 RPM) has 115 more torque (in Nm) than 2007 Mazda CX-9. (338 Nm @ 4500 RPM). This means 2009 Jeep Commander will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2007 Mazda CX-9.
Compare all specifications:
| 2009 Jeep Commander | 2007 Mazda CX-9 | |
| Make | Jeep | Mazda |
| Model | Commander | CX-9 |
| Year Released | 2009 | 2007 |
| Body Type | SUV | SUV |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 4701 cc | 3496 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 305 HP | 263 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5650 RPM | 6250 RPM |
| Torque | 453 Nm | 338 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 3950 RPM | 4500 RPM |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | Automatic |
| Number of Seats | 7 seats | 7 seats |
| Number of Doors | 5 doors | 5 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 4790 mm | 5080 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1910 mm | 1940 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1840 mm | 1740 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2790 mm | 2880 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Highway | 12.4 L/100km | 9.8 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 16.8 L/100km | 13.1 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 15.7 L/100km | 11.8 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 80 L | 76 L |
