Jaguar XF (X260)
Car comparison
Jaguar XF (X260) 3.0d V6vsFord Taurus VII EcoBoost 325 V6
Compare specs, acceleration, fuel consumption, dimensions, practicality, and estimated running costs side by side.
New comparisonFord Taurus VII
EcoBoost 325 V6
Comparison overview
Use the estimates as comparison hints and verify exact figures before making decisions.
Best choices
Jaguar XF (X260) 3.0d V6
- Quickest 0-100 km/h6.2 s
- Fastest top speed265 km/h165 mph Unrestricted250 km/h155 mph Restricted
- Highest torque700 Nm516 lb-ft
- Lightest1,750 kg3,858 lb
- Lowest combined fuel consumption5.5 L/100 km42.8 mpg US51.4 mpg UK
- Best estimated range1,200 km746 mi
- Best overall score72/100
- Best performance score70/100
- Best economy score92/100
Ford Taurus VII EcoBoost 325 V6
- Most powerful329 hp245 kW
- Best power-to-weight175 hp/t131 kW/t5.7 kg/hp
- Largest trunk534 L
- Best practicality score77/100
Specification comparison
| Model | JaguarXF (X260)3.0d V6 | FordTaurus VIIEcoBoost 325 V6 |
|---|---|---|
| Power | 300hp224kW | 329hp245kW |
| Torque | 700Nm516lb-ft | 475Nm350lb-ft |
| Curb weight | 1,750kg3,858lb | 1,875kg4,134lb |
| Gross weight | 2,350kg5,181lb | - |
| Top speed | Unrestricted 265 km/h165 mph Restricted 250 km/h155 mph Calculated | 234 km/h 145 mph |
| To 99% top speed | 64.7s99% target: 262 km/h / 163 mph Calculated | 60.8s99% target: 232 km/h / 144 mph Calculated |
| 0-100 km/h | 6.2s | 6.9s |
| 0-200 km/h | 19.0s Calculated | 24.8s Calculated |
| 0-60 mph | 5.9s Calculated | 6.6s Calculated |
| Fuel consumption | 5.5L/100 km42.8mpg US51.4mpg UK | 9.2L/100 km25.6mpg US30.7mpg UK |
| Fuel consumption city | 6.6L/100 km35.6mpg US42.8mpg UK | - |
| Fuel consumption highway | 4.8L/100 km49mpg US58.9mpg UK | - |
| Quarter mile | 14.1s Calculated | 14.8s Calculated |
| Power-to-weight | 171hp/t128kW/t78hp/1000 lb Calculated | 175hp/t131kW/t80hp/1000 lb Calculated |
| Torque-to-weight | 400Nm/t268lb-ft/ton Calculated | 253Nm/t170lb-ft/ton Calculated |
| Estimated range | 1,200km746mi Calculated | 696km432mi Calculated |
| Displacement | 2,993cc183cu in | 2,694cc164cu in |
| Length | 4,954mm195in | 4,996mm197in |
| Width | 1,987mm78in | 1,878mm74in |
| Height | 1,457mm57in | 1,503mm59in |
| Wheelbase | 2,960mm117in | 2,949mm116in |
| Front track | 1,605mm63in | 1,608mm63in |
| Rear track | 1,594mm63in | 1,618mm64in |
| Ground clearance | 116mm5in | 133mm5in |
| Trunk volume | 505L | 534L |
| Doors | 4 | 4 |
| Seats | 5 | 5 |
| Fuel tank | 66L | 64L |
| CO2 emissions | 144g/km | - |
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.
- Jaguar XF (X260) 3.0d V6: Power / Torque
- Ford Taurus VII EcoBoost 325 V6: Power / Torque
| Vehicle | Peak power RPM | Peak torque RPM | Max engine speed |
|---|---|---|---|
| JaguarXF (X260)3.0d V6 | 4,000 rpm | 2,000 rpm | 4,250 rpm |
| FordTaurus VIIEcoBoost 325 V6 | 5,500 rpm | 2,500-4,500 rpm | 5,750 rpm |
Acceleration curve
Estimated speed over time for selected vehicles.
| Metric | JaguarXF (X260)3.0d V6 | FordTaurus VIIEcoBoost 325 V6 |
|---|---|---|
| Acceleration checkpoints | ||
0-60 mph 0-97 km/h | 5.9 s | 6.6 s |
0-100 km/h 0-62 mph | 6.2 s | 6.9 s |
0-200 km/h 0-124 mph | 19.0 s | 24.8 s |
| Top speed | Unrestricted 265 km/h165 mph Restricted 250 km/h155 mph Likely limited | 234 km/h 145 mph |
| Drag race simulation | ||
60 ft 18 m | 2.6 s | 2.7 s |
330 ft 101 m | 6.4 s | 6.7 s |
1/8 mile 201 m | 9.4 s | 9.9 s |
1000 ft 305 m | 12.0 s | 12.6 s |
1/4 mile 402 m | 14.1 s | 14.8 s |
Trap speed 1/4 mile 402 m | 173 km/h 107 mph | 162 km/h 100 mph |
Power comparison
Bar comparison chart for Power. Higher is better · hp / kW
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| JaguarXF (X260)3.0d V6 | 300 hp 224 kW |
| FordTaurus VIIEcoBoost 325 V6 | 329 hp 245 kW |
Ford Taurus VII EcoBoost 325 V6 has 29 hp more than Jaguar XF (X260) 3.0d V6.
The biggest power difference is between Jaguar XF (X260) 3.0d V6 and Ford Taurus VII EcoBoost 325 V6: 29 hp (22 kW).
Torque comparison
Bar comparison chart for Torque. Higher is better · Nm / lb-ft
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| JaguarXF (X260)3.0d V6 | 700 Nm 516 lb-ft |
| FordTaurus VIIEcoBoost 325 V6 | 475 Nm 350 lb-ft |
Curb weight comparison
Bar comparison chart for Curb weight. Lower is better · kg / lb
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| JaguarXF (X260)3.0d V6 | 1,750 kg 3,858 lb |
| FordTaurus VIIEcoBoost 325 V6 | 1,875 kg 4,134 lb |
Top speed without limiter comparison
Bar comparison chart for Top speed without limiter. Higher is better · km/h / mph
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| JaguarXF (X260)3.0d V6 | Unrestricted 265 km/h165 mph Restricted 250 km/h155 mph |
| FordTaurus VIIEcoBoost 325 V6 | 234 km/h 145 mph |
0-100 km/h comparison
Bar comparison chart for 0-100 km/h. Lower is better · seconds
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| JaguarXF (X260)3.0d V6 | 6.2 s |
| FordTaurus VIIEcoBoost 325 V6 | 6.9 s |
Although Ford Taurus VII EcoBoost 325 V6 has more power, Jaguar XF (X260) 3.0d V6 is quicker from 0-100 km/h.
The biggest 0-100 km/h difference is between Jaguar XF (X260) 3.0d V6 and Ford Taurus VII EcoBoost 325 V6: 0.7 s.
Fuel consumption comparison
Bar comparison chart for Fuel consumption. Lower is better · L/100 km / mpg US / mpg UK
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| JaguarXF (X260)3.0d V6 | 5.5 L/100 km 42.8 mpg US 51.4 mpg UK |
| FordTaurus VIIEcoBoost 325 V6 | 9.2 L/100 km 25.6 mpg US 30.7 mpg UK |
The biggest fuel consumption difference is between Jaguar XF (X260) 3.0d V6 and Ford Taurus VII EcoBoost 325 V6: 3.7 L/100 km.
Power-to-weight comparison
Bar comparison chart for Power-to-weight. Higher is better · hp/t / kW/t
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| JaguarXF (X260)3.0d V6 | 171 hp/t 128 kW/t 5.8 kg/hp |
| FordTaurus VIIEcoBoost 325 V6 | 175 hp/t 131 kW/t 5.7 kg/hp |
Estimated range comparison
Bar comparison chart for Estimated range. Higher is better · km / mi
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| JaguarXF (X260)3.0d V6 | 1,200 km 746 mi |
| FordTaurus VIIEcoBoost 325 V6 | 696 km 432 mi |
Performance spider chart
Radar chart comparing normalized performance and fuel-consumption scores.
| Vehicle | Power | Acceleration | Top speed |
|---|---|---|---|
| JaguarXF (X260)3.0d V6 | 300 hp 224 kW | 6.2 s | Unrestricted 265 km/h165 mph Restricted 250 km/h155 mph |
| FordTaurus VIIEcoBoost 325 V6 | 329 hp 245 kW | 6.9 s | 234 km/h 145 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 | ||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| JaguarXF (X260)3.0d V6 |
|
| ||||||||||||||
| FordTaurus VIIEcoBoost 325 V6 |
|
| ||||||||||||||
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 | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| JaguarXF (X260)3.0d V6 |
| 5.5 L/100 km 42.8 mpg US 51.4 mpg UK | ||||||
| FordTaurus VIIEcoBoost 325 V6 |
| 9.2 L/100 km 25.6 mpg US 30.7 mpg UK | ||||||
Jaguar XF (X260) 3.0d V6 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 |
|---|---|---|
| JaguarXF (X260)3.0d V6 | 5.5 L/100 km 42.8 mpg US 51.4 mpg UK | 6.2 s |
| FordTaurus VIIEcoBoost 325 V6 | 9.2 L/100 km 25.6 mpg US 30.7 mpg UK | 6.9 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 |
|---|---|---|
| JaguarXF (X260)3.0d V6 | 171 hp/t 128 kW/t 5.8 kg/hp | 5.5 L/100 km 42.8 mpg US 51.4 mpg UK |
| FordTaurus VIIEcoBoost 325 V6 | 175 hp/t 131 kW/t 5.7 kg/hp | 9.2 L/100 km 25.6 mpg US 30.7 mpg UK |
Detailed score breakdown
| Vehicle | JaguarXF (X260)3.0d V6 | FordTaurus VIIEcoBoost 325 V6 | ||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power | 300 hp 224 kW | 329 hp 245 kW | ||||||||||||||||
| Torque | 700 Nm 516 lb-ft | 475 Nm 350 lb-ft | ||||||||||||||||
| Acceleration | 6.2 s | 6.9 s | ||||||||||||||||
| Top speed | Unrestricted 265 km/h165 mph Restricted 250 km/h155 mph | 234 km/h 145 mph | ||||||||||||||||
| Lightness | 1,750 kg 3,858 lb | 1,875 kg 4,134 lb | ||||||||||||||||
| Fuel consumption | 5.5 L/100 km 42.8 mpg US 51.4 mpg UK | 9.2 L/100 km 25.6 mpg US 30.7 mpg UK | ||||||||||||||||
| Practicality |
|
| ||||||||||||||||
| Range score | 1,200 km 746 mi | 696 km 432 mi | ||||||||||||||||
| CO2 score | 144 g/km | - | ||||||||||||||||
| Trunk score | 505 L 17.8 cu ft | 534 L 18.9 cu ft | ||||||||||||||||
| Power-to-weight score | 171 hp/t 128 kW/t 5.8 kg/hp | 175 hp/t 131 kW/t 5.7 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 | Jaguar XF (X260) 3.0d V6 | Ford Taurus VII EcoBoost 325 V6 |
|---|---|---|
| Consumption | 5.5 L/100 km42.8 mpg US51.4 mpg UK | 9.2 L/100 km25.6 mpg US30.7 mpg UK |
| Cost / 100 km | 9.63 LC100 km | 16.10 LC100 km |
| Cost / 100 mi | 15.49 LC100 mi | 25.91 LC100 mi |
| Annual fuel used | 825 L218 US gal181 UK gal | 1,380 L365 US gal304 UK gal |
| Annual fuel cost | 1,444 LC/year | 2,415 LC/year |
Head-to-head comparisons
Jaguar XF (X260) 3.0d V6
- Has 225 Nm more
- Is 125 kg lighter
- Is 0.7 s quicker from 0-100 km/h
- Has 31 km/h (19 mph) higher top speed
- Uses 3.7 L/100 km less fuel
- Has 504 km (313 mi) more estimated range
Pros
- Quickest 0-100 km/h in this comparison
- Highest top speed
- Highest torque
- Lightest
- Lowest combined fuel consumption
- Best estimated range
Cons
- Lowest power
- Smallest trunk
Ford Taurus VII EcoBoost 325 V6
- Has 29 hp more
- Has 4 hp/t better power-to-weight
- Has 29 L more trunk volume
Pros
- Most powerful
- Best power-to-weight ratio
- Largest trunk
Cons
- Slowest 0-100 km/h
- Highest combined fuel consumption
- Heaviest
- Lowest top speed
Choose cars to compare
Popular comparisons























