Rover 75 2004 vs Jaguar X-Type 2001
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.5 Petrol | 2.5 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing chain | |
| Timing belt usually needs to be replaced more often than the chain, but it is usually significantly cheaper. Timing belt motors are generally quieter and less vibrating than chain motors. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 177 HP | 194 HP | |
| Torque: | 240 NM | 244 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.5 seconds | 8.9 seconds | |
|
Jaguar X-Type is a more dynamic driving. Rover 75 engine produces 17 HP less power than Jaguar X-Type, whereas torque is 4 NM less than Jaguar X-Type. Due to the lower power, Rover 75 reaches 100 km/h speed 0.6 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 10.5 | 10.3 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 10.6 l/100km | 11.3 l/100km | |
|
The Rover 75 is a better choice in terms of fuel economy based on user-reported consumption, although the specification shows otherwise. By specification Rover 75 consumes 0.2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Jaguar X-Type, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Rover 75 could require 30 litres more fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Rover 75 consumes 0.7 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Jaguar X-Type. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 65 litres | 61 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 610 km in combined cycle | 590 km in combined cycle | |
| 860 km on highway | 800 km on highway | ||
| 610 km with real consumption | 530 km with real consumption | ||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | 4x4 - AWD (all-wheel-drive) | |
|
Jaguar X-Type 2001: Vehicle has full-time all-wheel drive with 60/40 front-to-rear torque split via viscous-coupling, locking planetary differential. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 350'000 km | 480'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used, but under equal conditions the average life of a Jaguar X-Type engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 10 years | 8 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Land Rover Freelander, Kia Carnival, Rover 400 | Used also on Jaguar S-Type | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Rover 75 might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The Rover 75 engine has hydraulic tappets (lifters), providing quieter operation and no need for periodic adjustment, but they are more complex in design and can cause serious engine damage in case of failure. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.75 m | 4.67 m | |
| Width: | 1.78 m | 1.79 m | |
| Height: | 1.39 m | 1.39 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Rover 75 is 8 cm longer than the Jaguar X-Type, 1 cm narrower the height of the cars does not differ significantly. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 432 litres | 452 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
432 litres | 452 litres | |
| Despite its longer length, Rover 75 has 20 litres less trunk space than the Jaguar X-Type. This could mean that the Rover 75 uses more space in the cabin, so the driver and passengers could be more spacious and comfortable. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Jaguar X-Type (by 20 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.4 meters | 10.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Rover 75 is 0.6 metres more than that of the Jaguar X-Type, which means Rover 75 can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`000 | 2`120 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 1400 | 3600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Rover 75 has
|
Jaguar X-Type has
| |