CarteaCompare CarsDashing 1.6L Turbo vs Cherokee 3.2L Longitude

Dashing 1.6L Turbo vs Cherokee 3.2L Longitude Comparison

Car Information

Engine / Motor

200 km/h

185 km/h

4

/

1590 cc

/

Chinese

/

Dimensions

5 Seater

5 Seater

5 Doors

5 Doors

4590 mm

4624 mm

1900 mm

1860 mm

1685 mm

1681 mm

2720 mm

2718 mm

160 mm

/

/

841 L

Fuel Economy

12 Km/L

9.9 Km/L

57 L

60 L

12 Km/L

9.9 Km/L

Comfort

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

Smart Entry

/

/

/

Interior

/

/

Leather

/

Digital

/

Dual Zone

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

Electric

/

/

/

Standard

/

Safety

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

Infotainment

15.6

/

/

/

/

Android LCD

/

/

8

/

Chassis & Steering

Front Wheel Drive

All Wheel Drive

Key Spec

1.5 L - 1.6 L

2.4 L - 3.2 L

154 - 197 BHP

184 BHP - 272 BHP

6DCT & 7DCT & Automatic

Automatic

Gasoline

Gasoline & Petrol

TBD

TBD

5 - 5

5 Seater

Exterior

/

/

/

/

/

/

LED

/

/

/

/

/

Engine

In-Line

/

1.6 L

3.2 L

Gasoline

Gasoline

None

/

4

/

194 BHP

271 BHP

290 Nm

324 Nm

Technologies

/

/

/

/

Comparison of configuration highlights

  • Dashing 1.6L Turbo

    • Electronic engine immobilizer
    • Power Tailgate
    • 360 Degree camera
    • Rear Defogger
    • Rear Power Outlet
    • Heated Side Mirrors
    • Parking sensor rear
    • Parking sensor front
    • Keyless Start
    • Heater
    • Rear Camera
    • Headlight On Reminder
    • Remote key types
    • Sensor Rear Tailgate
    • Steering Adjustment
    • Anti-Theft Alarm System
    • Speed Sensing Auto Door Lock
    • Driver Seat Belt Warning
    • ABS
    • EBD/CBC
    • EBA/BA
    • Passive Pedestrian Protection
    • Child Lock
    • Speed Alert
    • Active braking
  • Cherokee 3.2L Longitude

    • Parking sensor rear
    • Parking sensor front
    • ABS

Review Comparison

Positive

  • Modern and attractive exterior design
  • Integrated interior fittings
  • Excellent value for the price

Negative

  • Engine performance needs improvement
  • Noise insulation is limited by driving methods
  • The suspension is solid off-road

Positive

  • No data found

Negative

  • No data found

Related comparisons

Editor's PickDashing 1.6L Turbo

Expert / Editor Recommendation

Choose Dashing 1.6L Turbo if you care more about price; choose Cherokee 3.2L Longitude if you care more about power.

Popular Car Comparisons

Jetour | Dashing 1.6L Turbo

VS

Jeep | Cherokee 3.2L Longitude

Jetour | Dashing 1.6L Turbo

VS

Toyota | Corolla Cross 1.8L GLI (HEV)

Jetour | Dashing 1.6L Turbo

VS

Opel | Mokka 1.2T Ultimate

Jetour | Dashing 1.6L Turbo

VS

Geely | Geely Geometry C 2024 400 GS

Jetour | Dashing 1.6L Turbo

VS

Haval | Haval H9 2018 2.0L Luxury (4WD)

Q&A

  • According to fuel consumption data, Dashing 1.6L Turbo has a fuel consumption of 8.33, while Cherokee 3.2L Longitude has a fuel consumption of 10.1. Therefore, Dashing 1.6L Turbo is more fuel-efficient.
  • In terms of interior space, Dashing 1.6L Turbo has a wheelbase of 2720 mm, while Cherokee 3.2L Longitude has a wheelbase of 2718 mm. Generally, the model with the longer wheelbase, Dashing 1.6L Turbo, offers more room.
  • Check drive type, ground clearance and torque together. Dashing 1.6L Turbo uses Front Wheel Drive, while Cherokee 3.2L Longitude uses All Wheel Drive.