XJL AWD v XF AWD puzzle
#1
![Default](/forum/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Just watched motorweek review of the XJL AWD.
On their acceleration runs they achieved 0-60 in 5.3 seconds, quicker than the 5.0.
Quarter mile was well under 14 seconds at over 100 mph.
On their test of the XF they achieved only 6.1 seconds 0-60 times and that for the rwd model. Their quarter mile was over 14 seconds me under 100 mph.
Same drivetrain and same weight. Same aero. What gives?
I can understand a few tenths between different cars and on different days but 0.8 seconds?
Any ideas? BTW, my AWD XF feels much quicker than my older 4.2 but officially the two cars are with a tenth or two of each other.
On their acceleration runs they achieved 0-60 in 5.3 seconds, quicker than the 5.0.
Quarter mile was well under 14 seconds at over 100 mph.
On their test of the XF they achieved only 6.1 seconds 0-60 times and that for the rwd model. Their quarter mile was over 14 seconds me under 100 mph.
Same drivetrain and same weight. Same aero. What gives?
I can understand a few tenths between different cars and on different days but 0.8 seconds?
Any ideas? BTW, my AWD XF feels much quicker than my older 4.2 but officially the two cars are with a tenth or two of each other.
#2
#3
![Default](/forum/images/icons/icon1.gif)
My initial thought would have to be tires?
Tires are the one thing that could make that much of a difference.
Top gear got in trouble for this cause they used near racing tires when doing the lap with a pagani recently, or something like that.
Ford was caught doing this too I think?
Does anyone know if they specially use different or more grippy tires?
Tires are the one thing that could make that much of a difference.
Top gear got in trouble for this cause they used near racing tires when doing the lap with a pagani recently, or something like that.
Ford was caught doing this too I think?
Does anyone know if they specially use different or more grippy tires?
#5
![Default](/forum/images/icons/icon1.gif)
The XJ is made of aluminum while the XF is all steel construction, therefore, heavier by more than 100 lbs. Having said that, my experience with my own XF vs. my XJL is that the XF feels quicker. Perhaps because it is more agile. The larger XJL and the XF are about the same weight.
Albert
Albert
#6
![Default](/forum/images/icons/icon1.gif)
The curb weights listed are within 50 lbs of each other. The rwd XF is lighter than the XJL.
I checked Jaguar USA website for listed curb weights.
Using aluminum saves only a relatively small amount of weight on a modern car, about 300 lbs in the case of the XJ.
Mind you, imagine what an aluminum XF might do. It might be only slightly heavier than an F Type.
Maybe it's a launch thing.
I checked Jaguar USA website for listed curb weights.
Using aluminum saves only a relatively small amount of weight on a modern car, about 300 lbs in the case of the XJ.
Mind you, imagine what an aluminum XF might do. It might be only slightly heavier than an F Type.
Maybe it's a launch thing.
#7
![Default](/forum/images/icons/icon1.gif)
The curb weights listed are within 50 lbs of each other. The rwd XF is lighter than the XJL.
I checked Jaguar USA website for listed curb weights.
Using aluminum saves only a relatively small amount of weight on a modern car, about 300 lbs in the case of the XJ.
Mind you, imagine what an aluminum XF might do. It might be only slightly heavier than an F Type.
Maybe it's a launch thing.
I checked Jaguar USA website for listed curb weights.
Using aluminum saves only a relatively small amount of weight on a modern car, about 300 lbs in the case of the XJ.
Mind you, imagine what an aluminum XF might do. It might be only slightly heavier than an F Type.
Maybe it's a launch thing.
Trending Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)