2006 Mazda CX-7 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 Mazda CX-7. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2006 Mazda CX-7 would be higher. At 5,000 cc (8 cylinders), 2010 Jaguar XF is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2010 Jaguar XF (510 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 266 more horse power than 2006 Mazda CX-7. (244 HP @ 5000 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2010 Jaguar XF should accelerate faster than 2006 Mazda CX-7.
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 Mazda CX-7, 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 (624 Nm @ 2500 RPM) has 274 more torque (in Nm) than 2006 Mazda CX-7. (350 Nm @ 2500 RPM). This means 2010 Jaguar XF will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2006 Mazda CX-7.
Compare all specifications:
2006 Mazda CX-7 | 2010 Jaguar XF | |
Make | Mazda | Jaguar |
Model | CX-7 | XF |
Year Released | 2006 | 2010 |
Body Type | SUV | Sedan |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 2298 cc | 5000 cc |
Horse Power | 244 HP | 510 HP |
Engine RPM | 5000 RPM | 6000 RPM |
Torque | 350 Nm | 624 Nm |
Torque RPM | 2500 RPM | 2500 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Front | Rear |
Transmission Type | Automatic | Automatic |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 5 doors | 4 doors |