Audi 100 1982 vs Jaguar XJ 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) / All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
Audi 100 is available with front wheel drive and four wheel (4x4) drive, while Jaguar XJ can be equipped only with front wheel drive. | |||
Engines: | 1.8 - 2.3 (petrol, diesel) | 3.4 - 5.3 (petrol) | |
Performance | |||
Power: | 69 - 165 HP | 162 - 290 HP | |
Torque: | 123 - 240 NM | 255 - 436 NM | |
Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 7.8 - 21.8 seconds | 8.7 - 11 seconds | |
Select a car version for a more accurate comparison! | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.7 - 10.9 | 12.5 - 14.1 | |
Audi 100 petrol engines consumes on average 4 litres less fuel per 100 km than Jaguar XJ. This comparison does not take engine capacity into account, so to compare the fuel consumption of specific engines, select the car version! | |||
Dimensions | |||
Length: | 4.79 m | 4.96 m | |
Width: | 1.81 m | 1.77 m | |
Height: | 1.42 m | 1.38 m | |
Audi 100 is 17 cm shorter than the Jaguar XJ, 4 cm wider, while the height of Audi 100 is 4 cm higher. | |||
Trunk capacity: | 570 litres | no data | |
Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
610 litres | no data | |
Turning diameter: | 11.6 meters | 13 meters | |
The turning circle of the Audi 100 is 1.4 metres less than that of the Jaguar XJ, which means Audi 100 can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
Gross weight (kg): | ~ 1`784 | ~ 1`500 | |
Safety: | no data | no data | |
Quality: | no data | no data | |
Average price (€): | 2000 | no data | |
Pros and Cons: |
Audi 100 has
|
Jaguar XJ has
| |