BMW M3 (E90)
Car comparison
BMW M3 (E90) 4.0 V8vsJaguar XF (X250) 4.2 V8
Compare specs, acceleration, fuel consumption, dimensions, practicality, and estimated running costs side by side.
New comparisonJaguar XF (X250)
4.2 V8
Comparison overview
Use the estimates as comparison hints and verify exact figures before making decisions.
Best choices
BMW M3 (E90) 4.0 V8
- Quickest 0-100 km/h4.9 s
- Fastest top speed265 km/h165 mph Unrestricted250 km/h155 mph Restricted
- Most powerful420 hp313 kW
- Lightest1,605 kg3,538 lb
- Best power-to-weight262 hp/t195 kW/t3.8 kg/hp
- Lowest combined fuel consumption12.4 L/100 km19.0 mpg US22.8 mpg UK
- Lowest city consumption17.9 L/100 km13.1 mpg US15.8 mpg UK
- Best economy score74/100
Jaguar XF (X250) 4.2 V8
- Highest torque560 Nm413 lb-ft
- Lowest highway consumption9.1 L/100 km25.8 mpg US31.0 mpg UK
- Best estimated range556 km345 mi
- Largest trunk540 L
- Best overall score75/100
- Best performance score74/100
- Best practicality score77/100
Specification comparison
| Model | BMWM3 (E90)4.0 V8 | JaguarXF (X250)4.2 V8 |
|---|---|---|
| Power | 420hp313kW | 416hp310kW |
| Torque | 400Nm295lb-ft | 560Nm413lb-ft |
| Curb weight | 1,605kg3,538lb | 1,842kg4,061lb |
| Gross weight | 2,150kg4,740lb | 2,330kg5,137lb |
| Top speed | Unrestricted 265 km/h165 mph Restricted 250 km/h155 mph Calculated | Unrestricted 265 km/h165 mph Restricted 250 km/h155 mph Calculated |
| To 99% top speed | 59.7s99% target: 262 km/h / 163 mph Calculated | 52.9s99% target: 262 km/h / 163 mph Calculated |
| 0-100 km/h | 4.9s | 5.4s |
| 0-200 km/h | 16.2s | 16.1s Calculated |
| 0-60 mph | 4.7s Calculated | 5.2s Calculated |
| Fuel consumption | 12.4L/100 km19mpg US22.8mpg UK | 12.6L/100 km18.7mpg US22.4mpg UK |
| Fuel consumption city | 17.9L/100 km13.1mpg US15.8mpg UK | 18.7L/100 km12.6mpg US15.1mpg UK |
| Fuel consumption highway | 9.2L/100 km25.6mpg US30.7mpg UK | 9.1L/100 km25.8mpg US31.0mpg UK |
| Quarter mile | 13.0s Calculated | 13.3s Calculated |
| Power-to-weight | 262hp/t195kW/t119hp/1000 lb Calculated | 226hp/t168kW/t102hp/1000 lb Calculated |
| Torque-to-weight | 249Nm/t167lb-ft/ton Calculated | 304Nm/t203lb-ft/ton Calculated |
| Estimated range | 508km316mi Calculated | 556km345mi Calculated |
| Displacement | 3,999cc244cu in | 4,196cc256cu in |
| Length | 4,580mm180in | 4,961mm195in |
| Width | 1,817mm72in | 1,877mm74in |
| Height | 1,447mm57in | 1,460mm57in |
| Wheelbase | 2,761mm109in | 2,909mm115in |
| Front track | 1,540mm61in | 1,559mm61in |
| Rear track | 1,539mm61in | 1,571mm62in |
| Trunk volume | 450L | 540L |
| Doors | 4 | 4 |
| Seats | 5 | 5 |
| Fuel tank | 63L | 70L |
Performance charts
Use the estimates as comparison hints and verify exact figures before making decisions.
Dyno simulation
Estimated stock-style power and torque curves by engine speed.
- BMW M3 (E90) 4.0 V8: Power / Torque
- Jaguar XF (X250) 4.2 V8: Power / Torque
| Vehicle | Peak power RPM | Peak torque RPM | Max engine speed |
|---|---|---|---|
| BMWM3 (E90)4.0 V8 | 8,300 rpm | 3,900 rpm | 8,550 rpm |
| JaguarXF (X250)4.2 V8 | 6,250 rpm | 3,500 rpm | 6,500 rpm |
Acceleration curve
Estimated speed over time for selected vehicles.
| Metric | BMWM3 (E90)4.0 V8 | JaguarXF (X250)4.2 V8 |
|---|---|---|
| Acceleration checkpoints | ||
0-60 mph 0-97 km/h | 4.7 s | 5.2 s |
0-100 km/h 0-62 mph | 4.9 s | 5.4 s |
0-200 km/h 0-124 mph | 16.2 s | 16.1 s |
| Top speed | Unrestricted 265 km/h165 mph Restricted 250 km/h155 mph Limited | Unrestricted 265 km/h165 mph Restricted 250 km/h155 mph Likely limited |
| Drag race simulation | ||
60 ft 18 m | 2.2 s | 2.5 s |
330 ft 101 m | 5.7 s | 6.1 s |
1/8 mile 201 m | 8.5 s | 8.9 s |
1000 ft 305 m | 10.9 s | 11.3 s |
1/4 mile 402 m | 13.0 s | 13.3 s |
Trap speed 1/4 mile 402 m | 181 km/h 112 mph | 182 km/h 113 mph |
Power comparison
Bar comparison chart for Power. Higher is better · hp / kW
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| BMWM3 (E90)4.0 V8 | 420 hp 313 kW |
| JaguarXF (X250)4.2 V8 | 416 hp 310 kW |
BMW M3 (E90) 4.0 V8 has 4 hp more than Jaguar XF (X250) 4.2 V8.
The biggest power difference is between Jaguar XF (X250) 4.2 V8 and BMW M3 (E90) 4.0 V8: 4 hp (3 kW).
Torque comparison
Bar comparison chart for Torque. Higher is better · Nm / lb-ft
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| BMWM3 (E90)4.0 V8 | 400 Nm 295 lb-ft |
| JaguarXF (X250)4.2 V8 | 560 Nm 413 lb-ft |
Curb weight comparison
Bar comparison chart for Curb weight. Lower is better · kg / lb
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| BMWM3 (E90)4.0 V8 | 1,605 kg 3,538 lb |
| JaguarXF (X250)4.2 V8 | 1,842 kg 4,061 lb |
Top speed without limiter comparison
Bar comparison chart for Top speed without limiter. Higher is better · km/h / mph
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| BMWM3 (E90)4.0 V8 | Unrestricted 265 km/h165 mph Restricted 250 km/h155 mph |
| JaguarXF (X250)4.2 V8 | Unrestricted 265 km/h165 mph Restricted 250 km/h155 mph |
0-100 km/h comparison
Bar comparison chart for 0-100 km/h. Lower is better · seconds
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| BMWM3 (E90)4.0 V8 | 4.9 s |
| JaguarXF (X250)4.2 V8 | 5.4 s |
The biggest 0-100 km/h difference is between BMW M3 (E90) 4.0 V8 and Jaguar XF (X250) 4.2 V8: 0.5 s.
Fuel consumption comparison
Bar comparison chart for Fuel consumption. Lower is better · L/100 km / mpg US / mpg UK
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| BMWM3 (E90)4.0 V8 | 12.4 L/100 km 19.0 mpg US 22.8 mpg UK |
| JaguarXF (X250)4.2 V8 | 12.6 L/100 km 18.7 mpg US 22.4 mpg UK |
Power-to-weight comparison
Bar comparison chart for Power-to-weight. Higher is better · hp/t / kW/t
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| BMWM3 (E90)4.0 V8 | 262 hp/t 195 kW/t 3.8 kg/hp |
| JaguarXF (X250)4.2 V8 | 226 hp/t 168 kW/t 4.4 kg/hp |
Estimated range comparison
Bar comparison chart for Estimated range. Higher is better · km / mi
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| BMWM3 (E90)4.0 V8 | 508 km 316 mi |
| JaguarXF (X250)4.2 V8 | 556 km 345 mi |
Performance spider chart
Radar chart comparing normalized performance and fuel-consumption scores.
| Vehicle | Power | Acceleration | Top speed |
|---|---|---|---|
| BMWM3 (E90)4.0 V8 | 420 hp 313 kW | 4.9 s | Unrestricted 265 km/h165 mph Restricted 250 km/h155 mph |
| JaguarXF (X250)4.2 V8 | 416 hp 310 kW | 5.4 s | Unrestricted 265 km/h165 mph Restricted 250 km/h155 mph |
Most attractive quadrant
Scatter chart with performance score on the X axis and practicality score on the Y axis.
| Vehicle | Performance score | Practicality score | ||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| BMWM3 (E90)4.0 V8 |
|
| ||||||||||||||
| JaguarXF (X250)4.2 V8 |
|
| ||||||||||||||
Performance vs fuel economy
Cars closer to the top-right corner combine stronger performance with better fuel economy scores.
| Vehicle | Performance score | Fuel economy score | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| BMWM3 (E90)4.0 V8 |
| 12.4 L/100 km 19.0 mpg US 22.8 mpg UK | ||||||
| JaguarXF (X250)4.2 V8 |
| 12.6 L/100 km 18.7 mpg US 22.4 mpg UK | ||||||
BMW M3 (E90) 4.0 V8 is closest to the top-right balance target for performance and fuel economy.
Acceleration vs fuel consumption
Cars closer to the lower-left corner offer a better mix of quick acceleration and low fuel consumption.
| Vehicle | Fuel consumption, L/100 km | 0-100 km/h, s |
|---|---|---|
| BMWM3 (E90)4.0 V8 | 12.4 L/100 km 19.0 mpg US 22.8 mpg UK | 4.9 s |
| JaguarXF (X250)4.2 V8 | 12.6 L/100 km 18.7 mpg US 22.4 mpg UK | 5.4 s |
Power-to-weight vs fuel consumption
The shaded area favors higher power-to-weight with lower combined fuel consumption.
| Vehicle | Power-to-weight, hp/t | Fuel consumption, L/100 km |
|---|---|---|
| BMWM3 (E90)4.0 V8 | 262 hp/t 195 kW/t 3.8 kg/hp | 12.4 L/100 km 19.0 mpg US 22.8 mpg UK |
| JaguarXF (X250)4.2 V8 | 226 hp/t 168 kW/t 4.4 kg/hp | 12.6 L/100 km 18.7 mpg US 22.4 mpg UK |
Detailed score breakdown
| Vehicle | BMWM3 (E90)4.0 V8 | JaguarXF (X250)4.2 V8 | ||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power | 420 hp 313 kW | 416 hp 310 kW | ||||||||||||||||
| Torque | 400 Nm 295 lb-ft | 560 Nm 413 lb-ft | ||||||||||||||||
| Acceleration | 4.9 s | 5.4 s | ||||||||||||||||
| Top speed | Unrestricted 265 km/h165 mph Restricted 250 km/h155 mph | Unrestricted 265 km/h165 mph Restricted 250 km/h155 mph | ||||||||||||||||
| Lightness | 1,605 kg 3,538 lb | 1,842 kg 4,061 lb | ||||||||||||||||
| Fuel consumption | 12.4 L/100 km 19.0 mpg US 22.8 mpg UK | 12.6 L/100 km 18.7 mpg US 22.4 mpg UK | ||||||||||||||||
| Practicality |
|
| ||||||||||||||||
| Range score | 508 km 316 mi | 556 km 345 mi | ||||||||||||||||
| Trunk score | 450 L 15.9 cu ft | 540 L 19.1 cu ft | ||||||||||||||||
| Power-to-weight score | 262 hp/t 195 kW/t 3.8 kg/hp | 226 hp/t 168 kW/t 4.4 kg/hp | ||||||||||||||||
| Overall | Fixed score | Fixed score |
Fuel cost and annual usage
Estimate running costs from combined consumption, your annual distance, and the fuel price in your local currency.
Enter the fuel price in your local currency, for example €/L, $/gal, £/L or any other local currency.
LC = Local Currency
| Vehicle | BMW M3 (E90) 4.0 V8 | Jaguar XF (X250) 4.2 V8 |
|---|---|---|
| Consumption | 12.4 L/100 km19 mpg US22.8 mpg UK | 12.6 L/100 km18.7 mpg US22.4 mpg UK |
| Cost / 100 km | 21.70 LC100 km | 22.05 LC100 km |
| Cost / 100 mi | 34.92 LC100 mi | 35.49 LC100 mi |
| Annual fuel used | 1,860 L491 US gal409 UK gal | 1,890 L499 US gal416 UK gal |
| Annual fuel cost | 3,255 LC/year | 3,308 LC/year |
Head-to-head comparisons
BMW M3 (E90) 4.0 V8
- Has 4 hp more
- Is 237 kg lighter
- Is 0.5 s quicker from 0-100 km/h
- Uses 0.2 L/100 km less fuel
- Has 36 hp/t better power-to-weight
Pros
- Quickest 0-100 km/h in this comparison
- Highest top speed
- Most powerful
- Lightest
- Lowest combined fuel consumption
- Best power-to-weight ratio
Cons
- Smallest trunk
Jaguar XF (X250) 4.2 V8
- Has 160 Nm more
- Has 47 km (30 mi) more estimated range
- Has 90 L more trunk volume
Pros
- Highest torque
- Best estimated range
- Largest trunk
Cons
- Slowest 0-100 km/h
- Lowest power
- Highest combined fuel consumption
- Heaviest
Choose cars to compare
Popular comparisons























