2005 Dodge Dakota vs. 2010 Jaguar XJ
To start off, 2010 Jaguar XJ is newer by 5 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2005 Dodge Dakota. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2005 Dodge Dakota would be higher. At 4,200 cc (8 cylinders), 2010 Jaguar XJ is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2010 Jaguar XJ (297 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 87 more horse power than 2005 Dodge Dakota. (210 HP @ 5600 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2010 Jaguar XJ should accelerate faster than 2005 Dodge Dakota.
Let's talk about torque, 2005 Dodge Dakota (319 Nm) has 9 more torque (in Nm) than 2010 Jaguar XJ. (310 Nm). This means 2005 Dodge Dakota will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2010 Jaguar XJ.
Compare all specifications:
| 2005 Dodge Dakota | 2010 Jaguar XJ | |
| Make | Dodge | Jaguar |
| Model | Dakota | XJ |
| Year Released | 2005 | 2010 |
| Body Type | Pickup | Sedan |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 3703 cc | 4200 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 210 HP | 297 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5600 RPM | 6000 RPM |
| Torque | 319 Nm | 310 Nm |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 9.7:1 | 11.0:1 |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 5560 mm | 4970 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1830 mm | 1950 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1750 mm | 1470 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 3340 mm | 3040 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Highway | 10.7 L/100km | 9.4 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 14.7 L/100km | 14.7 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 83 L | 85 L |
