2009 Jeep Grand Cherokee vs. 2006 Mazda 3
To start off, 2009 Jeep Grand Cherokee is newer by 3 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2006 Mazda 3. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2006 Mazda 3 would be higher. At 3,701 cc (6 cylinders), 2009 Jeep Grand Cherokee is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2009 Jeep Grand Cherokee (210 HP @ 5200 RPM) has 60 more horse power than 2006 Mazda 3. (150 HP @ 6500 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2009 Jeep Grand Cherokee should accelerate faster than 2006 Mazda 3.
Because 2009 Jeep Grand Cherokee 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 Grand Cherokee. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2006 Mazda 3, 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 Grand Cherokee (319 Nm @ 4000 RPM) has 136 more torque (in Nm) than 2006 Mazda 3. (183 Nm @ 4500 RPM). This means 2009 Jeep Grand Cherokee will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2006 Mazda 3.
Compare all specifications:
| 2009 Jeep Grand Cherokee | 2006 Mazda 3 | |
| Make | Jeep | Mazda |
| Model | Grand Cherokee | 3 |
| Year Released | 2009 | 2006 |
| Body Type | SUV | Sedan |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 3701 cc | 1999 cc |
| Horse Power | 210 HP | 150 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5200 RPM | 6500 RPM |
| Torque | 319 Nm | 183 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 4000 RPM | 4500 RPM |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 5 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 4780 mm | 4540 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1850 mm | 1760 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1760 mm | 1470 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2790 mm | 2650 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Highway | 11.2 L/100km | 6.7 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 14.7 L/100km | 8.4 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 13.1 L/100km | 7.6 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 80 L | 55 L |
