Jaguar XF 2017 vs Ford Focus 2014
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Diesel | 2.0 Diesel | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 180 HP | 150 HP | |
| Torque: | 430 NM | 370 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 8.8 seconds | 8.9 seconds | |
| Jaguar XF engine produces 30 HP more power than Ford Focus, whereas torque is 60 NM more than Ford Focus. Thanks to more power Jaguar XF reaches 100 km/h speed 0.1 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.4 | 4.8 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.6 l/100km | 6.2 l/100km | |
|
The Ford Focus is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Jaguar XF consumes 0.6 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Ford Focus, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Jaguar XF could require 90 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Jaguar XF consumes 0.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Ford Focus. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 66 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1220 km in combined cycle | 1250 km in combined cycle | |
| 1600 km on highway | 1500 km on highway | ||
| 1000 km with real consumption | 960 km with real consumption | ||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
| Front-wheel drive cars (Ford Focus) 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 | 4.56 m | |
| Width: | 1.88 m | 1.86 m | |
| Height: | 1.50 m | 1.51 m | |
|
Jaguar XF is larger, but slightly lower. Jaguar XF is 40 cm longer than the Ford Focus, 2 cm wider, while the height of Jaguar XF is 1 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 565 litres | 490 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down, if possible |
no data | 1502 litres | |
|
Jaguar XF has more luggage capacity. Jaguar XF has 75 litres more trunk space than the Ford Focus. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.6 meters | 11 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Jaguar XF is 0.6 metres more than that of the Ford Focus, which means Jaguar XF can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight: | 2`320 kg | 2`050 kg | |
| Net weight: | 1`714 kg | 1`655 kg | |
| Load capacity: | 606 kg | 395 kg | |
| Jaguar XF load capacity (permitted cargo and passenger weight) is par apmēram 35 procentiem more than Ford Focus. Therefore, Jaguar XF is more suitable for longer family trips or transporting heavier loads. | |||
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | below average | |
| Average price (€): | 11 800 | 5400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Jaguar XF has
|
Ford Focus has
| |