2006 Ford E-350 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 Ford E-350. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2006 Ford E-350 would be higher. At 5,407 cc (8 cylinders), 2006 Ford E-350 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2006 Ford E-350 (255 HP) has 18 more horse power than 2010 Jaguar XF. (237 HP). In normal driving conditions, 2006 Ford E-350 should accelerate faster than 2010 Jaguar XF.
Because 2010 Jaguar XF is rear wheel drive (RWD), it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, it will be much easier to do with 2010 Jaguar XF. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2006 Ford E-350, being front wheel drive (FWD), will offer much better control with better grip. 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 25 more torque (in Nm) than 2006 Ford E-350. (475 Nm). This means 2010 Jaguar XF will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2006 Ford E-350.
Compare all specifications:
2006 Ford E-350 | 2010 Jaguar XF | |
Make | Ford | Jaguar |
Model | E-350 | XF |
Year Released | 2006 | 2010 |
Body Type | Van | Sedan |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 5407 cc | 3000 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | V |
Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 255 HP | 237 HP |
Torque | 475 Nm | 500 Nm |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Diesel |
Drive Type | Front | Rear |
Number of Seats | 12 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 5 doors | 4 doors |
Vehicle Length | 5390 mm | 4961 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1790 mm | 1877 mm |
Vehicle Height | 2120 mm | 1461 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 3510 mm | 2908 mm |
Fuel Consumption Overall | 15.7 L/100km | 6.3 L/100km |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 132 L | 70 L |