2006 Chevrolet Impala 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 Chevrolet Impala. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2006 Chevrolet Impala would be higher. At 3,884 cc (6 cylinders), 2006 Chevrolet Impala is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2013 Jaguar XJ (335 HP @ 6500 RPM) has 95 more horse power than 2006 Chevrolet Impala. (240 HP @ 6000 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2013 Jaguar XJ should accelerate faster than 2006 Chevrolet Impala.
Because 2013 Jaguar XJ is all wheel drive (AWD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2006 Chevrolet Impala. 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, 2013 Jaguar XJ (450 Nm @ 5000 RPM) has 122 more torque (in Nm) than 2006 Chevrolet Impala. (328 Nm @ 4400 RPM). This means 2013 Jaguar XJ will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2006 Chevrolet Impala.
Compare all specifications:
2006 Chevrolet Impala | 2013 Jaguar XJ | |
Make | Chevrolet | Jaguar |
Model | Impala | XJ |
Year Released | 2006 | 2013 |
Body Type | Sedan | Sedan |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 3884 cc | 2995 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | V |
Horse Power | 240 HP | 335 HP |
Engine RPM | 6000 RPM | 6500 RPM |
Torque | 328 Nm | 450 Nm |
Torque RPM | 4400 RPM | 5000 RPM |
Drive Type | Front | AWD |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 4 doors |
Vehicle Length | 5100 mm | 5127 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1860 mm | 2105 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1500 mm | 1456 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2810 mm | 3032 mm |
Fuel Consumption Highway | 8.7 L/100km | 7.6 L/100km |
Fuel Consumption City | 12.4 L/100km | 11.7 L/100km |