DETAILED CAR COMPARISON

2005 Land Rover Range Rover vs 2003 Jaguar XJ Comparison

Compare technical specifications, scores and everyday-use differences side by side.

VS
WINNER

Jaguar XJ

Leads the overall E-Kıyasla score by 0.75 points.

86.75–87.5
SPECIFICATION GROUPS

Every difference between the two cars

Basic Specifications

Land RoverMakeJaguar
Range RoverModelXJ
2005Model year2003
Off-road vehicleBody typeSedan
5Seats5
5Doors4

Performance

9,2 s0–100 km/h6,6 s
208 km/hTop speed250 km/h
4394 ccEngine displacement4196 cc
299 HPPower300 HP
425 NmTorque411 Nm
8Cylinders8

Fuel & Consumption

PetrolFuel typePetrol
105 ltFuel tank85 lt
21,2 ltUrban consumption16 lt
11,4 ltExtra-urban consumption8,1 lt
—Average consumption10,9 lt

Transmission & Chassis

4x4DrivetrainRear-wheel drive
6Gears6
225/60 R18Tyre size235/50 R18
YesABSYes

Dimensions

4950 mmLength5090 mm
1955 mmWidth1860 mm
1860 mmHeight1448 mm
2485 KgWeight1615 Kg
2880 mmWheelbase3034 mm

E-Kıyasla Editor’s Note

2005 Land Rover Range Rover and 2003 Jaguar XJ approach the same decision from different angles. We compare the exact versions so changes in engine, transmission, dimensions and equipment are not hidden behind the model names.

Overall, Jaguar XJ leads the E-Kıyasla score by 0.75 points. The score provides a consistent summary, while the best choice can still change with priorities such as urban efficiency, luggage space, performance or equipment.

SIMILAR COMPARISONS

Similar comparisons

Explore related comparisons featuring cars from this matchup.

Comments are loading…