2009 Mazda CX-9 vs. 2011 Jaguar XJ
To start off, 2011 Jaguar XJ is newer by 2 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2009 Mazda CX-9. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2009 Mazda CX-9 would be higher. At 5,000 cc (8 cylinders), 2011 Jaguar XJ is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2011 Jaguar XJ (385 HP @ 6500 RPM) has 117 more horse power than 2009 Mazda CX-9. (268 HP @ 6250 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2011 Jaguar XJ should accelerate faster than 2009 Mazda CX-9.
Because 2011 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 2011 Jaguar XJ. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2009 Mazda CX-9, 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, 2011 Jaguar XJ (515 Nm @ 3500 RPM) has 246 more torque (in Nm) than 2009 Mazda CX-9. (269 Nm @ 4250 RPM). This means 2011 Jaguar XJ will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2009 Mazda CX-9.
Compare all specifications:
| 2009 Mazda CX-9 | 2011 Jaguar XJ | |
| Make | Mazda | Jaguar |
| Model | CX-9 | XJ |
| Year Released | 2009 | 2011 |
| Body Type | SUV | Sedan |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 3727 cc | 5000 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 268 HP | 385 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6250 RPM | 6500 RPM |
| Torque | 269 Nm | 515 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 4250 RPM | 3500 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Front | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | Automatic |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 5 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 4600 mm | 5248 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1940 mm | 1895 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1730 mm | 1448 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2340 mm | 3157 mm |
| Fuel Consumption | 10.7 L/100km | 10.7 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 14.7 L/100km | 15.7 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 76 L | 82 L |
