2007 Mazda CX-9 vs. 2010 Jaguar XJ
To start off, 2010 Jaguar XJ is newer by 3 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2007 Mazda CX-9. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2007 Mazda CX-9 would be higher. At 4,200 cc (8 cylinders), 2010 Jaguar XJ is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2010 Jaguar XJ (297 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 33 more horse power than 2007 Mazda CX-9. (264 HP @ 6250 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2010 Jaguar XJ should accelerate faster than 2007 Mazda CX-9.
Because 2007 Mazda CX-9 is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2010 Jaguar XJ. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2007 Mazda CX-9 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, 2007 Mazda CX-9 (338 Nm @ 4500 RPM) has 28 more torque (in Nm) than 2010 Jaguar XJ. (310 Nm @ 4100 RPM). This means 2007 Mazda CX-9 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2010 Jaguar XJ.
Compare all specifications:
| 2007 Mazda CX-9 | 2010 Jaguar XJ | |
| Make | Mazda | Jaguar |
| Model | CX-9 | XJ |
| Year Released | 2007 | 2010 |
| Body Type | SUV | Sedan |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 3496 cc | 4200 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 264 HP | 297 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6250 RPM | 6000 RPM |
| Torque | 338 Nm | 310 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 4500 RPM | 4100 RPM |
| Drive Type | 4WD | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | Automatic |
| Number of Seats | 7 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 5 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 5080 mm | 4970 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1940 mm | 1950 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1740 mm | 1470 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2880 mm | 3040 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Highway | 10.7 L/100km | 9.4 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 14.7 L/100km | 14.7 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 76 L | 85 L |
