2006 Cadillac STS-V vs. 2013 Jaguar XJ
To start off, 2013 Jaguar XJ is newer by 7 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2006 Cadillac STS-V. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2006 Cadillac STS-V would be higher. At 5,000 cc (4 cylinders), 2013 Jaguar XJ is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2013 Jaguar XJ (464 HP @ 6500 RPM) has 24 more horse power than 2006 Cadillac STS-V. (440 HP @ 6400 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2013 Jaguar XJ should accelerate faster than 2006 Cadillac STS-V.
Because 2013 Jaguar XJ is all wheel drive (AWD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2006 Cadillac STS-V. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2013 Jaguar XJ will offer significantly more control. 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, 2006 Cadillac STS-V (584 Nm @ 3600 RPM) has 9 more torque (in Nm) than 2013 Jaguar XJ. (575 Nm @ 5000 RPM). This means 2006 Cadillac STS-V will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2013 Jaguar XJ.
Compare all specifications:
| 2006 Cadillac STS-V | 2013 Jaguar XJ | |
| Make | Cadillac | Jaguar |
| Model | STS-V | XJ |
| Year Released | 2006 | 2013 |
| Body Type | Sedan | Sedan |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 4376 cc | 5000 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | W |
| Horse Power | 440 HP | 464 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6400 RPM | 6500 RPM |
| Torque | 584 Nm | 575 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 3600 RPM | 5000 RPM |
| Drive Type | Rear | AWD |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | CVT |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 4990 mm | 5252 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1850 mm | 2105 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1480 mm | 1456 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2960 mm | 3157 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Highway | 11.8 L/100km | 7.9 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 16.8 L/100km | 16.9 L/100km |
