2004 Dodge Dakota vs. 2009 Jaguar XF
To start off, 2009 Jaguar XF is newer by 5 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2004 Dodge Dakota. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2004 Dodge Dakota would be higher. At 4,196 cc (8 cylinders), 2009 Jaguar XF is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2009 Jaguar XF (420 HP @ 6250 RPM) has 210 more horse power than 2004 Dodge Dakota. (210 HP @ 5600 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2009 Jaguar XF should accelerate faster than 2004 Dodge Dakota.
Let's talk about torque, 2009 Jaguar XF (560 Nm) has 241 more torque (in Nm) than 2004 Dodge Dakota. (319 Nm). This means 2009 Jaguar XF will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2004 Dodge Dakota.
Compare all specifications:
2004 Dodge Dakota | 2009 Jaguar XF | |
Make | Dodge | Jaguar |
Model | Dakota | XF |
Year Released | 2004 | 2009 |
Body Type | Pickup | Sedan |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 3687 cc | 4196 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | V |
Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 210 HP | 420 HP |
Engine RPM | 5600 RPM | 6250 RPM |
Torque | 319 Nm | 560 Nm |
Engine Compression Ratio | 9.1:1 | 9.1:1 |
Number of Seats | 6 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 2 doors | 4 doors |
Vehicle Length | 5470 mm | 4970 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1830 mm | 1880 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1690 mm | 1470 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 3330 mm | 2910 mm |
Fuel Consumption Highway | 10.7 L/100km | 10.2 L/100km |
Fuel Consumption City | 14.7 L/100km | 15.7 L/100km |
Fuel Consumption Overall | 13.1 L/100km | 13.8 L/100km |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 76 L | 70 L |