2006 Jaguar XK8 vs. 2008 Jeep Commander
To start off, 2008 Jeep Commander is newer by 2 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2006 Jaguar XK8. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2006 Jaguar XK8 would be higher. At 5,654 cc (8 cylinders), 2008 Jeep Commander is equipped with a bigger engine.
Because 2008 Jeep Commander is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2006 Jaguar XK8. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2008 Jeep Commander 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.
Compare all specifications:
| 2006 Jaguar XK8 | 2008 Jeep Commander | |
| Make | Jaguar | Jeep |
| Model | XK8 | Commander |
| Year Released | 2006 | 2008 |
| Body Type | Coupe | SUV |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 4196 cc | 5654 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 2 valves |
| Horse Power | 294 HP | 0 HP |
| Drive Type | Rear | 4WD |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | Automatic |
| Number of Seats | 4 seats | 7 seats |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 5 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 4770 mm | 4790 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1840 mm | 1910 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1300 mm | 1830 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2590 mm | 2790 mm |
| Fuel Consumption | 9.1 L/100km | 12.4 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 13.1 L/100km | 16.8 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 11.4 L/100km | 15.7 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 75 L | 80 L |
