Chevrolet Impala 2006 vs Jaguar XJ 2009
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 3.5 Petrol | 3.0 Diesel | |
| Petrol engines (Chevrolet Impala) are generally quieter, smoother, and better suited for short trips due to quicker warm-up times. Diesel (Jaguar XJ) engines, on the other hand, offer superior fuel efficiency and torque, making them ideal for long-distance driving and heavy loads. Read more: Petrol vs. Diesel: Fuel Economy and Key Differences. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 214 HP | 275 HP | |
| Torque: | 290 NM | 600 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9 seconds | n/a seconds | |
| Chevrolet Impala engine produces 61 HP less power than Jaguar XJ, whereas torque is 310 NM less than Jaguar XJ. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 9.0 | 7.2 | |
|
The Jaguar XJ is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Chevrolet Impala consumes 1.8 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Jaguar XJ, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Chevrolet Impala could require 270 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 66 litres | 82 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 730 km in combined cycle | 1130 km in combined cycle | |
| 860 km on highway | 1410 km on highway | ||
| Jaguar XJ gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | |
| Front-wheel drive cars (Chevrolet Impala) have better traction on slippery roads and when climbing hills, better fuel economy, and are less expensive to purchase. On the disadvantage side, FWD cars usually have less towing capacity, poorer acceleration and harder handling. Rear-wheel drive cars (Jaguar XJ) have better handling on dry roads, better acceleration, more even weight distribution and more fun to drive. RWD is also better for towing large loads. The cons of rear-wheel drive are less interior and trunk space and more difficulty maneuvering in wet and snowy conditions. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 5.09 m | 5.25 m | |
| Width: | 1.85 m | 1.89 m | |
| Height: | 1.49 m | 1.45 m | |
|
Chevrolet Impala is smaller, but higher. Chevrolet Impala is 16 cm shorter than the Jaguar XJ, 4 cm narrower, while the height of Chevrolet Impala is 4 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 527 litres | 520 litres | |
| Even though the car is shorter, Chevrolet Impala has 7 litres more trunk space than the Jaguar XJ. The Jaguar XJ may have more interior space, so the cabin could be more spacious and more comfortable for the driver and passengers. | |||
| Turning diameter: | no data | 12.7 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | no data | 2`365 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 5200 | 13 400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Chevrolet Impala has
|
Jaguar XJ has
| |