Ford Cougar 1998 vs Jaguar X-Type 2004
| Body: | Coupe | Estate car / wagon | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
| Engine: | 2.5 Petrol | 2.5 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 170 HP | 194 HP | |
| Torque: | 220 NM | 244 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.4 seconds | 9.2 seconds | |
|
Jaguar X-Type is a more dynamic driving. Ford Cougar engine produces 24 HP less power than Jaguar X-Type, whereas torque is 24 NM less than Jaguar X-Type. Due to the lower power, Ford Cougar reaches 100 km/h speed 1.2 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 9.6 | 10.4 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 10.5 l/100km | 11.3 l/100km | |
|
The Ford Cougar is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Ford Cougar consumes 0.8 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Jaguar X-Type, which means that by driving the Ford Cougar over 15,000 km in a year you can save 120 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Ford Cougar consumes 0.8 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Jaguar X-Type. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 61 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 620 km in combined cycle | 580 km in combined cycle | |
| 830 km on highway | 790 km on highway | ||
| 570 km with real consumption | 530 km with real consumption | ||
| Ford Cougar 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) | 4x4 - AWD (all-wheel-drive) | |
|
Jaguar X-Type 2004: 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: | 420'000 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: | 5 years | 8 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Ford Mondeo | 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. Jaguar X-Type might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The Ford Cougar 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: | 4.70 m | 4.72 m | |
| Width: | 1.77 m | 1.79 m | |
| Height: | 1.32 m | 1.48 m | |
|
Ford Cougar is smaller. Ford Cougar is 2 cm shorter than the Jaguar X-Type, 2 cm narrower, while the height of Ford Cougar is 16 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 430 litres | 445 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
930 litres | 1415 litres | |
| Ford Cougar has 15 litres less trunk space than the Jaguar X-Type. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Jaguar X-Type (by 485 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.9 meters | 10.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Ford Cougar is 0.1 metres more than that of the Jaguar X-Type. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`825 | no data | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 1600 | 2600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Ford Cougar has
|
Jaguar X-Type has
| |