2009 Jaguar XF vs. 2008 Jeep Commander
To start off, 2009 Jaguar XF is newer by 1 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2008 Jeep Commander. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2008 Jeep Commander would be higher. At 2,987 cc, 2008 Jeep Commander is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2008 Jeep Commander weights approximately 639 kg more than 2009 Jaguar XF.
Because 2008 Jeep Commander is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2009 Jaguar XF. 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. Let's talk about torque, 2008 Jeep Commander (510 Nm @ 1600 RPM) has 75 more torque (in Nm) than 2009 Jaguar XF. (435 Nm @ 1900 RPM). This means 2008 Jeep Commander will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2009 Jaguar XF.
Compare all specifications:
2009 Jaguar XF | 2008 Jeep Commander | |
Make | Jaguar | Jeep |
Model | XF | Commander |
Year Released | 2009 | 2008 |
Body Type | Sedan | SUV |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 2701 cc | 2987 cc |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 204 HP | 0 HP |
Torque | 435 Nm | 510 Nm |
Torque RPM | 1900 RPM | 1600 RPM |
Engine Compression Ratio | 17.3:1 | 18.0:1 |
Drive Type | Front | 4WD |
Transmission Type | Automatic | Automatic |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 7 seats |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 5 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 1771 kg | 2410 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4970 mm | 4790 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1880 mm | 1830 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1470 mm | 2270 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2920 mm | 2790 mm |
Fuel Consumption Overall | 7.5 L/100km | 9.3 L/100km |