Jaguar F-Pace 2015 vs Volvo XC60 2017
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Diesel | 2.0 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing belt | |
| Engine chain usually needs to be replaced less often than the timing belt, but the cost of replacing the chain is usually higher. Chain motors are considered to be more reliable, but noisier and more vibration generating. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 180 HP | 190 HP | |
| Torque: | 430 NM | 400 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 8.7 seconds | 8.4 seconds | |
|
Volvo XC60 is a more dynamic driving. Jaguar F-Pace engine produces 10 HP less power than Volvo XC60, but torque is 30 NM more than Volvo XC60. Due to the lower power, Jaguar F-Pace reaches 100 km/h speed 0.3 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.3 | 5.2 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.2 l/100km | 7.3 l/100km | |
|
By specification Jaguar F-Pace consumes 0.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volvo XC60, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Jaguar F-Pace could require 15 litres more fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Jaguar F-Pace consumes 0.1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Volvo XC60. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1130 km in combined cycle | 1150 km in combined cycle | |
| 1270 km on highway | 1270 km on highway | ||
| 830 km with real consumption | 820 km with real consumption | ||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | 4x4 - AWD (all-wheel-drive) | |
| Ground clearance: | 213 mm (8.4 inches) | 216 mm (8.5 inches) | |
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 350'000 km | 380'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 9 years | 10 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 6 other car models, including Jaguar XF, Land Rover Range Rover Evoque, Jaguar XE, Land Rover Discovery Sport | Installed on at least 8 other car models, including Volvo V40, Volvo V60, Volvo V40 Cross Country, Volvo S90 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Volvo XC60 might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The Jaguar F-Pace 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: | 4.73 m | 4.69 m | |
| Width: | 2.07 m | 2.00 m | |
| Height: | 1.65 m | 1.66 m | |
|
Jaguar F-Pace is larger, but slightly lower. Jaguar F-Pace is 4 cm longer than the Volvo XC60, 7 cm wider the height of the cars does not differ significantly. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 508 litres | 505 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
650 litres | 1432 litres | |
| Jaguar F-Pace has 3 litres more trunk space than the Volvo XC60. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Volvo XC60 (by 782 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 12.3 meters | 11.4 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Jaguar F-Pace is 0.9 metres more than that of the Volvo XC60, which means Jaguar F-Pace can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`460 | no data | |
| Safety: | |||
| Volvo XC60 scores higher in safety tests. The Volvo XC60 scores significantly higher in active safety technologies (stability control, lane assist, automatic braking, etc.) tests. | |||
| Quality: | no data | average | |
| Average price (€): | 30 800 | 29 000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Jaguar F-Pace has
|
Volvo XC60 has
| |