2009 Jaguar XJ vs. 2008 Toyota Matrix
To start off, 2009 Jaguar XJ is newer by 1 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2008 Toyota Matrix. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2008 Toyota Matrix would be higher. At 4,196 cc (8 cylinders), 2009 Jaguar XJ is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2009 Jaguar XJ (400 HP @ 6100 RPM) has 274 more horse power than 2008 Toyota Matrix. (126 HP @ 6000 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2009 Jaguar XJ should accelerate faster than 2008 Toyota Matrix. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2009 Jaguar XJ weights approximately 379 kg more than 2008 Toyota Matrix. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Because 2009 Jaguar XJ 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 XJ. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2008 Toyota Matrix, 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 XJ (560 Nm @ 3500 RPM) has 395 more torque (in Nm) than 2008 Toyota Matrix. (165 Nm @ 4200 RPM). This means 2009 Jaguar XJ will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2008 Toyota Matrix. 2009 Jaguar XJ has automatic transmission and 2008 Toyota Matrix has manual transmission. 2008 Toyota Matrix will offer better control over acceleration and deceleration in addition to better fuel efficiency overall. 2009 Jaguar XJ will be easier to drive especially in heavy traffic.
Compare all specifications:
| 2009 Jaguar XJ | 2008 Toyota Matrix | |
| Make | Jaguar | Toyota |
| Model | XJ | Matrix |
| Year Released | 2009 | 2008 |
| Body Type | Sedan | Hatchback |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 4196 cc | 1794 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 400 HP | 126 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6100 RPM | 6000 RPM |
| Torque | 560 Nm | 165 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 3500 RPM | 4200 RPM |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 9.1:1 | 10.0:1 |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | Manual |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 5 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1734 kg | 1355 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 5220 mm | 4360 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1950 mm | 1780 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1460 mm | 1570 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 3170 mm | 2610 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Highway | 10.8 L/100km | 7.1 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 15.8 L/100km | 9.1 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 13.2 L/100km | 8.1 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 84 L | 50 L |
