Jaguar XJ 1982 vs Audi 100 1982

Select specific versions of each model (by engine capacity, power, drivetrain and gearbox) for an accurate comparison

 
Jaguar XJ
1982 - 1986
Audi 100
1982 - 1988
Gearbox: Manual/AutomaticManual/Automatic
Wheel drive type: Front wheel drive (FWD)Front wheel drive (FWD) / All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4)
Jaguar XJ is available only with front wheel drive, while Audi 100 can be equipped with front wheel drive and four wheel (4x4) drive.
Engines: 3.4 - 5.3 (petrol)1.8 - 2.3 (petrol, diesel)

Performance

Power: 162 - 290 HP69 - 165 HP
Torque: 255 - 436 NM123 - 240 NM
Acceleration 0-100 km/h: 8.7 - 11 seconds7.8 - 21.8 seconds
Select a car version for a more accurate comparison!

Fuel consumption

Fuel consumption (l/100km): 12.5 - 14.16.7 - 10.9
Jaguar XJ petrol engines consumes on average 4 litres more fuel per 100 km than Audi 100.
This comparison does not take engine capacity into account, so to compare the fuel consumption of specific engines, select the car version!

Dimensions

Length: 4.96 m4.79 m
Width: 1.77 m1.81 m
Height: 1.38 m1.42 m
Jaguar XJ is 17 cm longer than the Audi 100, 4 cm narrower, while the height of Jaguar XJ is 4 cm lower.
Trunk capacity: no data570 litres
Trunk max capacity:
with rear seats folded down
no data610 litres
Turning diameter: 13 meters11.6 meters
The turning circle of the Jaguar XJ is 1.4 metres more than that of the Audi 100, which means Jaguar XJ can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces.
Gross weight (kg): ~ 1`500~ 1`784
Safety: no datano data
Quality: no datano data
Average price (€): no data2000
Pros and Cons: Jaguar XJ has
  • only petrol engines available
Audi 100 has
  • available with 4x4 drive
  • petrol and diesel engines available
  • lower fuel consumption for petrol engines
  • better manoeuvrability
Share these results to social networks or e-mail
Contact us: info@auto-abc.lv