2006 Chevrolet TrailBlazer vs. 2010 Jaguar XF
To start off, 2010 Jaguar XF is newer by 4 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2006 Chevrolet TrailBlazer. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2006 Chevrolet TrailBlazer would be higher. At 4,163 cc (6 cylinders), 2006 Chevrolet TrailBlazer is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2006 Chevrolet TrailBlazer (291 HP) has 54 more horse power than 2010 Jaguar XF. (237 HP). In normal driving conditions, 2006 Chevrolet TrailBlazer should accelerate faster than 2010 Jaguar XF.
Because 2006 Chevrolet TrailBlazer is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2010 Jaguar XF. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2006 Chevrolet TrailBlazer 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, 2010 Jaguar XF (500 Nm) has 124 more torque (in Nm) than 2006 Chevrolet TrailBlazer. (376 Nm). This means 2010 Jaguar XF will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2006 Chevrolet TrailBlazer.
Compare all specifications:
2006 Chevrolet TrailBlazer | 2010 Jaguar XF | |
Make | Chevrolet | Jaguar |
Model | TrailBlazer | XF |
Year Released | 2006 | 2010 |
Body Type | SUV | Sedan |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 4163 cc | 3000 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | V |
Horse Power | 291 HP | 237 HP |
Torque | 376 Nm | 500 Nm |
Drive Type | 4WD | Rear |
Number of Seats | 7 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 4 doors |
Vehicle Length | 5280 mm | 4961 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1900 mm | 1877 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1920 mm | 1461 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 3280 mm | 2908 mm |
Fuel Consumption Overall | 13.8 L/100km | 6.3 L/100km |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 95 L | 70 L |