Jaguar XF 2011 vs Mazda 6 2012
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.2 Diesel | 2.2 Diesel | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 190 HP | 150 HP | |
| Torque: | n/a NM | 380 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 8.5 seconds | 9.1 seconds | |
|
Jaguar XF is more dynamic to drive. Jaguar XF engine produces 40 HP more power than Mazda 6. Thanks to more power Jaguar XF reaches 100 km/h speed 0.6 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.4 | 3.9 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.7 l/100km | 6.0 l/100km | |
|
The Mazda 6 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Jaguar XF consumes 1.5 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 6, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Jaguar XF could require 225 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Jaguar XF consumes 1.7 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 6. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 70 litres | 62 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1290 km in combined cycle | 1580 km in combined cycle | |
| 1450 km on highway | 1820 km on highway | ||
| 900 km with real consumption | 1030 km with real consumption | ||
| Mazda 6 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: | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
| Front-wheel drive cars (Mazda 6) 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. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.96 m | 4.87 m | |
| Width: | 1.88 m | 1.84 m | |
| Height: | 1.46 m | 1.45 m | |
|
Jaguar XF is larger. Jaguar XF is 9 cm longer than the Mazda 6, 4 cm wider, while the height of Jaguar XF is 1 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 540 litres | 489 litres | |
|
Jaguar XF has more luggage capacity. Jaguar XF has 51 litres more trunk space than the Mazda 6. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.4 meters | 10.2 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Jaguar XF is 1.2 metres more than that of the Mazda 6, which means Jaguar XF can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`320 | no data | |
| Safety: | |||
| Mazda 6 scores higher in safety tests. The Mazda 6 scores higher in active safety technologies (stability control, lane assist, automatic braking, etc.) tests. | |||
| Quality: | no data | average | |
| Average price (€): | 8800 | 7200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Jaguar XF has
|
Mazda 6 has
| |