2010 Honda Jazz vs. 2003 Jeep Grand Cherokee
To start off, 2010 Honda Jazz is newer by 7 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2003 Jeep Grand Cherokee. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2003 Jeep Grand Cherokee would be higher. At 3,966 cc (6 cylinders), 2003 Jeep Grand Cherokee is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2003 Jeep Grand Cherokee (195 HP) has 118 more horse power than 2010 Honda Jazz. (77 HP) In normal driving conditions, 2003 Jeep Grand Cherokee should accelerate faster than 2010 Honda Jazz. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2003 Jeep Grand Cherokee weights approximately 752 kg more than 2010 Honda Jazz. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Let's talk about torque, 2003 Jeep Grand Cherokee (312 Nm) has 202 more torque (in Nm) than 2010 Honda Jazz. (110 Nm). This means 2003 Jeep Grand Cherokee will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2010 Honda Jazz.
Compare all specifications:
2010 Honda Jazz | 2003 Jeep Grand Cherokee | |
Make | Honda | Jeep |
Model | Jazz | Grand Cherokee |
Year Released | 2010 | 2003 |
Body Type | Hatchback | SUV |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1245 cc | 3966 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 77 HP | 195 HP |
Torque | 110 Nm | 312 Nm |
Fuel Type | Gasoline - Premium | Gasoline |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 5 doors | 5 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 1048 kg | 1800 kg |
Vehicle Length | 3840 mm | 4610 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1680 mm | 1840 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1530 mm | 1770 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2460 mm | 2700 mm |
Fuel Consumption Overall | 5.5 L/100km | 13.1 L/100km |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 42 L | 78 L |