2005 BMW 530 vs. 2012 Jaguar XF
To start off, 2012 Jaguar XF is newer by 7 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2005 BMW 530. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2005 BMW 530 would be higher. At 2,999 cc (6 cylinders), 2005 BMW 530 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2005 BMW 530 (227 HP) has 40 more horse power than 2012 Jaguar XF. (187 HP). In normal driving conditions, 2005 BMW 530 should accelerate faster than 2012 Jaguar XF.
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, 2012 Jaguar XF (450 Nm) has 150 more torque (in Nm) than 2005 BMW 530. (300 Nm). This means 2012 Jaguar XF will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2005 BMW 530.
Compare all specifications:
2005 BMW 530 | 2012 Jaguar XF | |
Make | BMW | Jaguar |
Model | 530 | XF |
Year Released | 2005 | 2012 |
Body Type | Sedan | Sedan |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 2999 cc | 2200 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 227 HP | 187 HP |
Torque | 300 Nm | 450 Nm |
Acceleration 0-100mph | 7.9 seconds | 8 seconds |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Transmission Type | Automatic | 6-speed shiftable automatic |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 4 doors |
Vehicle Length | 4850 mm | 4961 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1850 mm | 1877 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1470 mm | 1461 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2900 mm | 2908 mm |
Fuel Consumption Overall | 9.3 L/100km | 5.4 L/100km |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 70 L | 70 L |