2002 Jaguar XJ vs. 2013 BMW 6 series
To start off, 2013 BMW 6 series is newer by 11 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2002 Jaguar XJ. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2002 Jaguar XJ would be higher. At 4,196 cc (8 cylinders), 2002 Jaguar XJ is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2013 BMW 6 series (311 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 10 more horse power than 2002 Jaguar XJ. (301 HP @ 4000 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2013 BMW 6 series should accelerate faster than 2002 Jaguar XJ. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2013 BMW 6 series weights approximately 15 kg more than 2002 Jaguar XJ. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Both vehicles are rear wheel drive (RWD) - it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, both vehicles do the job better than front wheel drive vehicles. With that said, do keep in mind that many other factors such as speed and the wear on your tires can also have significant impact on traction and control. Let's talk about torque, 2002 Jaguar XJ (541 Nm) has 94 more torque (in Nm) than 2013 BMW 6 series. (447 Nm). This means 2002 Jaguar XJ will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2013 BMW 6 series.
Compare all specifications:
| 2002 Jaguar XJ | 2013 BMW 6 series | |
| Make | Jaguar | BMW |
| Model | XJ | 6 series |
| Year Released | 2002 | 2013 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 4196 cc | 2979 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Horse Power | 301 HP | 311 HP |
| Engine RPM | 4000 RPM | 6000 RPM |
| Torque | 541 Nm | 447 Nm |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | 8-speed automatic |
| Number of Seats | 4 seats | 4 seats |
| Vehicle Weight | 1800 kg | 1815 kg |
| Wheelbase Size | 3040 mm | 2856 mm |
