2009 Jaguar XF vs. 2000 Mercury Sable
To start off, 2009 Jaguar XF is newer by 9 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2000 Mercury Sable. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2000 Mercury Sable would be higher. At 4,196 cc (8 cylinders), 2009 Jaguar XF is equipped with a bigger engine.
Because 2009 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 2009 Jaguar XF. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2000 Mercury Sable, 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, 2009 Jaguar XF (560 Nm) has 312 more torque (in Nm) than 2000 Mercury Sable. (248 Nm). This means 2009 Jaguar XF will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2000 Mercury Sable.
Compare all specifications:
| 2009 Jaguar XF | 2000 Mercury Sable | |
| Make | Jaguar | Mercury |
| Model | XF | Sable |
| Year Released | 2009 | 2000 |
| Body Type | Sedan | Sedan |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 4196 cc | 3001 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 420 HP | 0 HP |
| Torque | 560 Nm | 248 Nm |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | Automatic |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 6 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 4970 mm | 5100 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1880 mm | 1860 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1470 mm | 1420 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2910 mm | 2760 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 70 L | 68 L |
