Jaguar XJ 2012 vs Volvo V40 2014
| Body: | Sedan | Hatchback | |
|---|---|---|---|
| The hatchback generally has more luggage space thanks to a larger trunk door opening and the ability to convert the rear of the passenger compartment into luggage space. Sedans tend to be quieter than hatchbacks, due to a more isolated rear area. | |||
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 240 HP | 245 HP | |
| Torque: | 340 NM | 350 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 7.5 seconds | 6.3 seconds | |
|
Volvo V40 is a more dynamic driving. Jaguar XJ engine produces 5 HP less power than Volvo V40, whereas torque is 10 NM less than Volvo V40. Due to the lower power, Jaguar XJ reaches 100 km/h speed 1.2 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 9.3 | 5.9 | |
|
The Volvo V40 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Jaguar XJ consumes 3.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volvo V40, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Jaguar XJ could require 510 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 82 litres | 62 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 880 km in combined cycle | 1050 km in combined cycle | |
| 1200 km on highway | 1290 km on highway | ||
| Volvo V40 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 (Volvo V40) 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 XJ) 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: | 5.12 m | 4.37 m | |
| Width: | 1.89 m | 1.86 m | |
| Height: | 1.45 m | 1.44 m | |
|
Jaguar XJ is larger. Jaguar XJ is 75 cm longer than the Volvo V40, 4 cm wider the height of the cars does not differ significantly. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | 335 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 12.3 meters | 11.2 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Jaguar XJ is 1.1 metres more than that of the Volvo V40, which means Jaguar XJ can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`240 | no data | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | no data | above average | |
| Average price (€): | 14 200 | 8200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
|
Volvo V40 has
| |