Chevrolet Malibu 1997 vs Jaguar XJ 1997
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 3.1 Petrol | 3.2 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 173 HP | 240 HP | |
| Torque: | 264 NM | 316 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | n/a seconds | 8.5 seconds | |
| Chevrolet Malibu engine produces 67 HP less power than Jaguar XJ, whereas torque is 52 NM less than Jaguar XJ. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | no data | 12.1 | |
| Fuel tank capacity: | 54 litres | 81 litres | |
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | |
| Front-wheel drive cars (Chevrolet Malibu) 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: | 4.84 m | 5.02 m | |
| Width: | 1.76 m | 1.80 m | |
| Height: | 1.43 m | 1.31 m | |
|
Chevrolet Malibu is smaller, but higher. Chevrolet Malibu is 18 cm shorter than the Jaguar XJ, 4 cm narrower, while the height of Chevrolet Malibu is 12 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 490 litres | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | no data | 12.1 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | no data | 1`900 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | no data | 7400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
|
Jaguar XJ has
| |