Model Year | 2013 | 2006 | |
Model | Jeep Grand Cherokee | ||
Engine | |||
Transmission | |||
Drivetrain | |||
Body | |||
Difference | |||
Total Legroom | 0 in (over 1 rows) | 0 in (over 1 rows) | 0 in |
2013 Seat Room and Comfort: Pros | ||
Year | Comment | |
2014 | Like the G37, the Q50 has one of the roomiest rear seats among BMW 3-Series challengers. On paper it offers the most combined rear legroom, 44.5 inches in the front seat and 35.1 inches in back, about 2.5 more than the BMW and Lexus. But the difference doesn't seem as large as this number suggests. The Audi S4 and Cadillac ATS remain more cramped. The Q50 doesn't come by its extra room through brilliant packaging. Instead, at 188 inches it's about a half-foot longer than a 3-Series or ATS. see full review |
None of our members have yet commented on the seat room and comfort of the 2013 .
2006 Jeep Grand Cherokee Seat Room and Comfort: Pros | ||
Year | Body/Powertrain | Comment |
2005 | 4dr SUV 210-horsepower 3.7L V6 5-speed shiftable automatic RWD |
Very comfortable driving. see full Jeep Grand Cherokee review |
2006 Jeep Grand Cherokee Seat Room and Comfort: Cons | ||
Year | Body/Powertrain | Comment |
2007 | 4dr SUV 235-horsepower 4.7L V8 5-speed shiftable automatic AWD w/low range |
That and MPG are the only real faults so far after 15000 miles and 15 mons. I think our 2001 GC has more seat comfort although the 07s seats do fold over easier than the 01s. see full Jeep Grand Cherokee review |
2005 | 4dr SUV 210-horsepower 3.7L V6 5-speed shiftable automatic RWD |
Very little leg room for an adult. see full Jeep Grand Cherokee review |