Compare two cars

Compare any two cars and get our Virtual Adviser™ opinion

Car #1
Make
Model
Variant
Engine
Car #2
Make
Model
Variant
Engine

compare selected cars
2016. -
J - SUV
suv, 5 door
rear
Badges
Production
Vehicle class
Body style
Wheel drive
Safety
2016. - 2020.
J - SUV
suv, 5 door
4 x 4

Marketing

!function(v,t,o){var a=t.createElement("script");a.src="https://ad.vidverto.io/vidverto/js/aries/v1/invocation.js",a.setAttribute("fetchpriority","high");var r=v.top;r.document.head.appendChild(a),v.self!==v.top&&(v.frameElement.style.cssText="width:0px!important;height:0px!important;"),r.aries=r.aries||{},r.aries.v1=r.aries.v1||{commands:[]};var c=r.aries.v1;c.commands.push((function(){var d=document.getElementById("_vidverto-725dc94bb887f000f0b279c49613751c");d.setAttribute("id",(d.getAttribute("id")+(new Date()).getTime()));var t=v.frameElement||d;c.mount("10285",t,{width:720,height:405})}))}(window,document); */ ?>

Dimensons & Outlines

4731 mm
2070 mm
1652 mm
650 liters
650 liters
60 liters
Length
Width
Height
Boot (min)
Boot (max)
Fuel tank
4663 mm
1893 mm
1659 mm
550 liters
1510 liters
70 liters
2016 Jaguar F-Pace
2016 Audi Q5

Engine

Jaguar / Land Rover
2.0 Ingenium 180
Diesel
4 - Inline, 4 valves per cylinder
Turbo
1999 cc
180 hp
430 Nm
Engine
Fuel
Configuration
Aspiration
Displacement
Power
Torque
Volkswagen
2.0 TDI CNHA
Diesel
4 - Inline, 4 valves per cylinder
Turbo
1968 cc
190 hp
400 Nm

Performance (manual gearbox)

manual gearbox - 6 gears
1665 kg
8.9 s
209 km/h
5.7 l/100km
4.5 l/100km
4.9 l/100km
129 g/km
Gearbox type
Vehicle weight
Acc. 0-100
Top speed
Cons. (urban)
Cons. (highway)
Cons. (average)
CO2 emissions
 
kg
s
km/h
l/100km
l/100km
l/100km
g/km

Performance (automatic gearbox)

 
kg
s
km/h
l/100km
l/100km
l/100km
g/km
Gearbox type
Vehicle weight
Acc. 0-100
Top speed
Cons. (urban)
Cons. (highway)
Cons. (average)
CO2 emissions
dual clutch - 7 gears
1770 kg
7.9 s
218 km/h
5.3 l/100km
4.7 l/100km
4.9 l/100km
129 g/km

Expenses

25900 EUR
Price from
23000 EUR

Virtual Adviser's™ opinion

Overview

Two significantly similar cars, no doubt about that. Still, each one has something different to offer. Having both cars powered by diesel engines and utilizing the 5-door suv body style within the same 'SUV' segment, the only major difference here really is their wheel drive configuration (rear for the Jaguar and 4 x 4 in the case of the Audi). The first one has a Jaguar-engineered powertrain under the hood, a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 180hp unit, while the other one gets its power and torque from a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 190hp engine designed by Volkswagen.

Safety

Both vehicles got tested by European New Car Assessment Programme (Euro NCAP), with the same number of safety stars gained in the process. Still, apart from the official crash test results there are other things we need to be aware of. Both vehicles belong to the suv segment, which is generally a very good thing safety-wise, but it doesn't do much to help us decide between the two. On the other hand, when it comes to weight, a factor that most people underestimate, the German car offers a marginal difference of 6% more metal.

Reliability

Manufacturers have been building their reliability reputation for decades now and, generally speaking, it appears that both brands display similar results in faults and breakdowns, when all the models are taken into account. These are the results of an independent reasearch, while our visitors describe reliability of Jaguar, as well as Audi, with the same average rating of 4.2 out of 5. Some independent research have also placed F-Pace as average reliability-wise, and Q5 is more or less at the same level.That apart, owners of different cars powered by the same engine as the British car rank it on average as 3.0, while the one under the competitor's bonnet gets 3.6 out of 5.

Performance & Fuel economy

Audi is undoubtly more agile, reaching 100km/h in 1 seconds less than its competitor. In addition to that it accelerates all the way to 218 kilometers per hour, 9km/h more than the other car. When it comes to fuel economy things look pretty much the same for both cars, averaging around 4.9 liters of fuel per 100 kilometers (58 mpg), in combined cycle.


Verdict

Audi appears just a bit more reliable, although the difference is truly marginal. The most important thing when deciding between any two vehicles should always be safety, both passive and active. In my opinion, everything taken into account, the German car offers slightly better overall protection and takes the lead. It all continues in the same direction, with Audi outracing its opponent in any situation possible, making it better choice for boy racers. Fuel consumption is more or less the same. It's not difficult to say then that if I'd need to make a choice, it would definitely be the Audi. Anyway, that's the most objective conclusion I could've came up with and it's based solely on the information found on this website. Aspects such as design, practicality, brand value and driving experience are there for you to measure them out. Also, you could use the oportunity to find out which car, everything taken into account, would be the perfect choice for you in the eyes of the virtual adviser, out of 12.000+ vehicles we currently have in our database.

Check a car by its VIN number

Follow us

AutoManiac Instagram

AutoManiac Facebook

AutoManiac database currently covers:

47worldwide automotive brands
1.565different vehicle models
2.275engines
14.080specific cars