Model Year | 2012 | 2016 | |
Model | Jeep Grand Cherokee | Ford Mustang | |
Engine | |||
Transmission | |||
Drivetrain | |||
Body | 4dr SUV | 2dr Coupe | |
Difference | |||
Wheelbase | 2,916 mm | 2,720 mm | 0 mm |
Length | 4,821 mm | 4,783 mm | 0 mm |
Width | 1,938 mm | 1,915 mm | 0 mm |
Height | 1,763 mm | 1,382 mm | 0 mm |
Curb Weight | 2,028 kg | 1,599 kg | 1 kg |
Fuel Capacity | 93 L | 61 L | 32 L |
Headroom, Row 1 | 1,016 mm | 955 mm | -954 mm |
Shoulder Room, Row 1 | 1,488 mm | 1,430 mm | 0 mm |
Hip Room, Row 1 | 1,448 mm | 1,394 mm | 0 mm |
Legroom, Row 1 | 1,024 mm | 1,067 mm | 0 mm |
Headroom, Row 2 | 998 mm | 884 mm | 114 mm |
Shoulder Room, Row 2 | 1,473 mm | 1,326 mm | 0 mm |
Hip Room, Row 2 | 1,435 mm | 1,204 mm | 0 mm |
Legroom, Row 2 | 980 mm | 777 mm | 203 mm |
Total Legroom | 2,004 mm (over 2 rows) | 1,844 mm (over 2 rows) | 1 mm |
Cargo Volume, Minimum | 1,028 L | 382 L | -381 L |
Cargo Volume, Maximum | 1,934 L | 13.5 | -12.5 L |
2012 Jeep Grand Cherokee Seat Room and Comfort: Pros | ||
Year | Comment | |
2013 | You can buy a BMW X5 or Porsche Cayenne with tame front seats, but not the Grand Cherokee SRT8. In the Jeep, SRT's signature buckets are standard. Large, firm bolsters provide excellent lateral support even to those of us with slender builds. Yet they're also comfortable, with enough padding to avoid park bench references. The four-way adjustable lumbar didn't do much for my back, but your experience may vary. Moving to the back seat, the Grand Cherokee's growth adds a couple of badly needed inches to legroom. With this improvement the Grand Cherokee only matches other similarly sized SUVs, so it's not a reason to buy. But rear seat legroom is no longer a reason not to buy, so it bears mentioning. see full Jeep Grand Cherokee review |
2012 Jeep Grand Cherokee Seat Room and Comfort: Pros | ||
Year | Body/Powertrain | Comment |
2011 | 4dr SUV 360-horsepower 5.7L V8 5-speed shiftable automatic AWD w/low range |
Seats are supportive and highly adjustable. see full Jeep Grand Cherokee review |
2011 | 4dr SUV 360-horsepower 5.7L V8 5-speed shiftable automatic AWD w/low range |
Huge rear seat leg room and reclining rear seats see full Jeep Grand Cherokee review |
2011 | 4dr SUV 290-horsepower 3.6L V6 5-speed shiftable automatic AWD w/low range |
Great head room (no sunroof), excellent ergonomic design to the seat backs, and vertically adjustable lumbar support see full Jeep Grand Cherokee review |
2012 Jeep Grand Cherokee Seat Room and Comfort: Cons | ||
Year | Body/Powertrain | Comment |
2011 | 4dr SUV 360-horsepower 5.7L V8 5-speed shiftable automatic AWD w/low range |
They are harder than I would like. I came from an F150 with the luxury package and the seats were amazing, these sears are hard and could be improved upon by being softer. see full Jeep Grand Cherokee review |
2016 Ford Mustang Seat Room and Comfort: Cons | ||
Year | Comment | |
This "why not" should not come as a surprise. Neither the Mustang nor the Audi has much rear legroom. Plus in the Mustang my head was pressed against the rear window, and I'm only 5-9. The Mustang coupe's rear seat is viable only for people up to 5-6 or so in height. The Audi has a little more rear headroom. As does the Mustang convertible. If you will be putting people into the rear seat of the Mustang, you should turn off the "easy entry" feature. When it's activated, this feature automatically motors the seat backward when the engine is shut off, reducing rear legroom to near zero. I was nearly trapped when I turned the engine off while sitting in the back seat to take photos. If you want a V8-powered coupe with a roomy rear seat, get a Dodge Challenger. Both the Mustang and the RS 5 do a better job of transporting luggage than rear seat passengers. Both trunks have about as much capacity as that of the average compact sedan. see full Ford Mustang review |
None of our members have yet commented on the seat room and comfort of the 2016 Ford Mustang.