Ford Mondeo 2013 vs Jaguar XF 2015
| Gearbox: | Manual | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.6 Petrol | 2.0 Diesel | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 178 HP | 180 HP | |
| Torque: | 249 NM | 430 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | n/a seconds | 8.1 seconds | |
| Ford Mondeo engine produces 2 HP less power than Jaguar XF, whereas torque is 181 NM less than Jaguar XF. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.1 | 4.3 | |
|
The Jaguar XF is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Ford Mondeo consumes 3.8 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Jaguar XF, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Ford Mondeo could require 570 litres more fuel. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | |
| Front-wheel drive cars (Ford Mondeo) 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 2015 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 2015 2.0 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.87 m | 4.95 m | |
| Width: | 1.85 m | 1.99 m | |
| Height: | 1.48 m | 1.46 m | |
|
Ford Mondeo is smaller, but slightly higher. Ford Mondeo is 8 cm shorter than the Jaguar XF, 14 cm narrower, while the height of Ford Mondeo is 2 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 429 litres | 540 litres | |
|
Jaguar XF has more luggage space. Ford Mondeo has 111 litres less trunk space than the Jaguar XF. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.6 meters | 11.6 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | no data | 2`250 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Jaguar XF scores higher in safety tests. The Jaguar XF scores significantly higher in active safety technologies (stability control, lane assist, automatic braking, etc.) tests. | |||
| Quality: | low | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 11 000 | 21 800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Ford Mondeo has
|
Jaguar XF has
| |