Jaguar XJ 1982 vs Audi 100 1982
Select specific versions of each model (by engine capacity, power, drivetrain and gearbox) for an accurate comparison
Gearbox: | Manual/Automatic | Manual/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 HP | 69 - 165 HP | |
Torque: | 255 - 436 NM | 123 - 240 NM | |
Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 8.7 - 11 seconds | 7.8 - 21.8 seconds | |
Select a car version for a more accurate comparison! | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 12.5 - 14.1 | 6.7 - 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 m | 4.79 m | |
Width: | 1.77 m | 1.81 m | |
Height: | 1.38 m | 1.42 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 data | 570 litres | |
Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 610 litres | |
Turning diameter: | 13 meters | 11.6 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 data | no data | |
Quality: | no data | no data | |
Average price (€): | no data | 2000 | |
Pros and Cons: |
Jaguar XJ has
|
Audi 100 has
| |