2004 Jaguar XJ vs. 2010 Ford Fusion
To start off, 2010 Ford Fusion is newer by 6 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2004 Jaguar XJ. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2004 Jaguar XJ would be higher. At 4,193 cc (8 cylinders), 2004 Jaguar XJ is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2004 Jaguar XJ weights approximately 2 kg more than 2010 Ford Fusion.
Because 2004 Jaguar XJ is rear wheel drive (RWD), it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, it will be much easier to do with 2004 Jaguar XJ. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2010 Ford Fusion, being front wheel drive (FWD), will offer much better control with better grip. 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.
Compare all specifications:
| 2004 Jaguar XJ | 2010 Ford Fusion | |
| Make | Jaguar | Ford |
| Model | XJ | Fusion |
| Year Released | 2004 | 2010 |
| Body Type | Sedan | Sedan |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 4193 cc | 2500 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 400 HP | 0 HP |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | CVT |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1689 kg | 1687 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 5220 mm | 4841 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1870 mm | 1834 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1450 mm | 1445 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 3170 mm | 2728 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Highway | 9 L/100km | 6.5 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 18.6 L/100km | 5.7 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 85 L | 64 L |
