2008 BMW 735 vs. 2009 Jaguar XF
To start off, 2009 Jaguar XF is newer by 1 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2008 BMW 735. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2008 BMW 735 would be higher. At 4,196 cc (8 cylinders), 2009 Jaguar XF is equipped with a bigger engine.
Both vehicles are rear wheel drive (RWD) - it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, both vehicles do the job better than front wheel drive vehicles. 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, 2009 Jaguar XF (560 Nm @ 4000 RPM) has 200 more torque (in Nm) than 2008 BMW 735. (360 Nm @ 3700 RPM). This means 2009 Jaguar XF will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2008 BMW 735.
Compare all specifications:
2008 BMW 735 | 2009 Jaguar XF | |
Make | BMW | Jaguar |
Model | 735 | XF |
Year Released | 2008 | 2009 |
Body Type | Sedan | Sedan |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 3600 cc | 4196 cc |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 0 HP | 420 HP |
Torque | 360 Nm | 560 Nm |
Torque RPM | 3700 RPM | 4000 RPM |
Engine Compression Ratio | 10.5:1 | 9.1:1 |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Transmission Type | Automatic | Automatic |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 4 doors |
Vehicle Length | 5040 mm | 4970 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1910 mm | 1880 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1500 mm | 1470 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 3000 mm | 2910 mm |
Fuel Consumption Overall | 10.7 L/100km | 13.8 L/100km |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 88 L | 70 L |