Jaguar XF 2019 vs Mazda 6 2018
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 3.0 Diesel | 2.5 Petrol | |
| Diesel (Jaguar XF) engines typically outperform gasoline engines in terms of fuel efficiency and low-end torque. This makes them more economical and better suited for towing or long-distance travel. However, gasoline (Mazda 6) engines mostly are lighter, quieter, and offer better acceleration and responsiveness, especially in smaller vehicles. For more information, see the article "Diesel or Petrol: Fuel Economy and Key Differences." | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 300 HP | 194 HP | |
| Torque: | 700 NM | 258 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 6.4 seconds | 7.8 seconds | |
|
Jaguar XF is more dynamic to drive. Jaguar XF engine produces 106 HP more power than Mazda 6, whereas torque is 442 NM more than Mazda 6. Thanks to more power Jaguar XF reaches 100 km/h speed 1.4 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.9 | 4.7 | |
|
The Mazda 6 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Jaguar XF consumes 1.2 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 180 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 66 litres | 62 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1110 km in combined cycle | 1310 km in combined cycle | |
| 1290 km on highway | 1510 km on highway | ||
| 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. | |||
| Ground clearance: | 116 mm (4.6 inches) | 165 mm (6.5 inches) | |
| Because of the higher ground clearance, Mazda 6 can perform better on bad roads - it can go over higher obstacles and bumps. At the same time, the higher ground clearance can reduce stability and handling on paved roads, especially at higher speeds. Note, however, that this Mazda 6 version does not have 4x4 drive, which is very important in poor road conditions. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.95 m | 4.87 m | |
| Width: | no data | 1.84 m | |
| Height: | 1.46 m | 1.45 m | |
| Trunk capacity: | 540 litres | 489 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down, if possible |
885 litres | no data | |
|
Jaguar XF has more luggage capacity. Even though the car is shorter, The Mazda 6 may have more interior space, so the cabin could be more spacious and more comfortable for the driver and passengers. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.9 meters | 12 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Jaguar XF is 0.1 metres less than that of the Mazda 6. | |||
| Gross weight: | 2`390 kg | 2`095 kg | |
| Net weight: | 1`803 kg | 1`462 kg | |
| Load capacity: | 587 kg | 633 kg | |
| Safety: | |||
| Mazda 6 is better rated in child safety tests. The Jaguar XF scores higher in active safety technologies (stability control, lane assist, automatic braking, etc.) tests. | |||
| Quality: | no data | low | |
| Average price (€): | 17 200 | 22 000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Jaguar XF has
|
Mazda 6 has
| |