Jaguar XF 2012 vs Chevrolet Malibu 2011
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 3.0 Petrol | 2.4 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 340 HP | 167 HP | |
| Torque: | 450 NM | 225 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 5.9 seconds | 10.2 seconds | |
|
Jaguar XF is more dynamic to drive. Jaguar XF engine produces 173 HP more power than Chevrolet Malibu, whereas torque is 225 NM more than Chevrolet Malibu. Thanks to more power Jaguar XF reaches 100 km/h speed 4.3 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 9.4 | 8.0 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 12.3 l/100km | 10.3 l/100km | |
|
The Chevrolet Malibu is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Jaguar XF consumes 1.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Chevrolet Malibu, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Jaguar XF could require 210 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Jaguar XF consumes 2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Chevrolet Malibu. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 70 litres | 73 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 740 km in combined cycle | 910 km in combined cycle | |
| 1060 km on highway | 1210 km on highway | ||
| 560 km with real consumption | 700 km with real consumption | ||
| Chevrolet Malibu 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 (Chevrolet Malibu) 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. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 420'000 km | 420'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 7 years | 8 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Jaguar XJ, Jaguar F-Type, Jaguar F-Pace, Jaguar XE | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Chevrolet Captiva, Opel Antara | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Jaguar XF might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The Chevrolet Malibu 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: | 4.96 m | 4.87 m | |
| Width: | 1.88 m | 1.86 m | |
| Height: | 1.46 m | 1.47 m | |
|
Jaguar XF is larger, but slightly lower. Jaguar XF is 10 cm longer than the Chevrolet Malibu, 2 cm wider the height of the cars does not differ significantly. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 540 litres | 545 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 11.4 meters | 11.4 meters | |
| Gross weight: | 2`315 kg | 2`100 kg | |
| Net weight: | 1`770 kg | 1`539 kg | |
| Load capacity: | 545 kg | 561 kg | |
| Safety: | |||
| Chevrolet Malibu scores higher in safety tests. | |||
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 8400 | 6400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Jaguar XF has
|
Chevrolet Malibu has
| |