2009 Mazda CX-9 vs. 2004 Jeep Grand Cherokee
To start off, 2009 Mazda CX-9 is newer by 5 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2004 Jeep Grand Cherokee. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2004 Jeep Grand Cherokee would be higher. At 4,701 cc (8 cylinders), 2004 Jeep Grand Cherokee is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2009 Mazda CX-9 (268 HP) has 2 more horse power than 2004 Jeep Grand Cherokee. (266 HP). In normal driving conditions, 2009 Mazda CX-9 should accelerate faster than 2004 Jeep Grand Cherokee.
Because 2004 Jeep Grand Cherokee is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2009 Mazda CX-9. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2004 Jeep Grand Cherokee 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, 2004 Jeep Grand Cherokee (450 Nm) has 181 more torque (in Nm) than 2009 Mazda CX-9. (269 Nm). This means 2004 Jeep Grand Cherokee will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2009 Mazda CX-9.
Compare all specifications:
| 2009 Mazda CX-9 | 2004 Jeep Grand Cherokee | |
| Make | Mazda | Jeep |
| Model | CX-9 | Grand Cherokee |
| Year Released | 2009 | 2004 |
| Body Type | SUV | SUV |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 3727 cc | 4701 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Horse Power | 268 HP | 266 HP |
| Torque | 269 Nm | 450 Nm |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Front | 4WD |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | Automatic |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 5 doors | 5 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 4600 mm | 4620 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1940 mm | 1850 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1730 mm | 1770 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2340 mm | 2700 mm |
