2004 Jaguar XJ vs. 2011 Saab 9-4X
To start off, 2011 Saab 9-4X is newer by 7 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 4,195 cc (8 cylinders), 2004 Jaguar XJ is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2004 Jaguar XJ (294 HP @ 6100 RPM) has 29 more horse power than 2011 Saab 9-4X. (265 HP @ 6950 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2004 Jaguar XJ should accelerate faster than 2011 Saab 9-4X.
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, 2011 Saab 9-4X, 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. Let's talk about torque, 2004 Jaguar XJ (411 Nm) has 109 more torque (in Nm) than 2011 Saab 9-4X. (302 Nm). This means 2004 Jaguar XJ will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2011 Saab 9-4X.
Compare all specifications:
| 2004 Jaguar XJ | 2011 Saab 9-4X | |
| Make | Jaguar | Saab |
| Model | XJ | 9-4X |
| Year Released | 2004 | 2011 |
| Body Type | Sedan | SUV |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 4195 cc | 3000 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 294 HP | 265 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6100 RPM | 6950 RPM |
| Torque | 411 Nm | 302 Nm |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | Automatic |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 5 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 5100 mm | 4829 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1870 mm | 1905 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1450 mm | 1679 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 3040 mm | 2807 mm |
| Fuel Consumption | 8.4 L/100km | 9.4 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 13.1 L/100km | 13.1 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 85 L | 80 L |
