Jaguar XF 2017 vs Seat Exeo 2012
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Diesel | 2.0 Diesel | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 163 HP | 143 HP | |
| Torque: | 380 NM | 320 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.4 seconds | n/a seconds | |
| Jaguar XF engine produces 20 HP more power than Seat Exeo, whereas torque is 60 NM more than Seat Exeo. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 4.5 | no data | |
| Fuel tank capacity: | 55 litres | 70 litres | |
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
| Front-wheel drive cars (Seat Exeo) 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 XF) 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. | |||
| Jaguar XF 2017 2.0 engine: This engine is known for its relatively limited lifespan. In early production models, balance shaft bearings wore out quickly and started making noise. The chain-driven timing system, located on the flywheel ... More about Jaguar XF 2017 2.0 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.95 m | no data | |
| Width: | 1.88 m | no data | |
| Height: | 1.50 m | no data | |
| Trunk capacity: | 565 litres | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 11.6 meters | no data | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`260 | no data | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | average | |
| Average price (€): | 14 800 | 6000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Jaguar XF has
|
Seat Exeo has
| |