Giant test – BMW 530d F10 2014 vs Jaguar XF 2.2 D 2014. The German carmakers are constantly at loggerheads with each other to prove who’s is better. But the Bavarian is yet not ready to concede any ground to the Briton. Who will come out on top: The Jag or the Bimmer?
BMW’s arch rivals have always been its German counterparts like Mercedes Benz and Audi. But now, across the English channel, there is another car company that is ready to take on the Bavarian giant. The big cat, Jaguar, follows a very different philosophy than BMW in making cars. So it was only apt that we pit the two against each other — the new Jaguar XF S 2.2 diesel and the BMW 530d F10.
Aesthetics
Aesthetically both cars couldn’t be more different from each other. The BMW sports a stately look with an underlying sporty character made more prominent by the M sport bodykit. This bit of kit features large air intakes upfront, the M forged-aluminuim alloys and an M sport steering wheel. The Jaguar, on the other hand, sports an aggressive styling with sharp headlamps, large grille and sharp lines adorning the bonnet along with a dome.
Interior dimensions
Step inside the XF and you are treated to a simplistic, yet functional interior. The dash is finished in brushed aluminium, the infotainment system has a touchscreen interface, which means the centre console is almost devoid of buttons apart from the volume control, climate control knobs and the handshake gear shifter. The quality of the interior is a bit disappointing. The interior feels well-finished, but lacks the aura of richness. The fact is affirmed by the leather on the steering wheel, which doesn’t feel as good to hold. The leather seats and soft-feel plastic dash too fail to give you the feeling of being in an expensive car.
In contrast, the Bimmer offers a much richer interior. The leather used is not only top- notch, but the way the upholstery is done makes the car feel plush and expensive. There is also elaborate use of wood in both cars, but the BMW offers a much better aesthetic appeal. Everything from the steering (especially the steering), the buttons and the iDrive controller feels good to touch and ergonomically placed. Even the plastic bits on the Bimmer feel better. The seats too are comfortable and come with extendable seat squabs for the taller passengers.
On the go
When you first unlock the Jaguar and park yourself on the driver’s seat, the car welcomes you with a heartbeat pattern light on the engine start button. Thumb the starter and the engine comes to life with a rather calm demeanour and the gear shifter knob rises out of the transmission tunnel. It might seem a bit gimmicky, but looks good. But, there is a slight pause between the time you shift the knob to D and the gearbox slots into gear. The Jag takes off effortlessly, however, there is latency in gearshifts and it shows in the XF’s performance figures. This latency is mainly due to the eight-speed transmission being a single clutch operation rather than the double clutch on the BMW. The time the transmission takes to disengage and re-engage the clutch, it eats into the Jaguar’s performance. The suspension is tuned to perfection and the car offers a sublime ride. The suspension can swallow any undulation with relative ease at both low and high speeds. In the corners too, the
Jag is capable enough to hold its own. The steering provides a decent amount of feedback and feel. The suspension stiffness allows the car to absorb any mid-corner bumps. The Jag has an air of compromise. The BMW feels a lot more urgent. The seven-speed dual clutch gearbox makes for quick shifts. The steering though lacks a bit of feedback, up for it in sharpness. The stiff suspension makes the ride at slow speeds a bit harsh, but once at speed it can swallow everything. In sport mode the Bimmer comes into its own, the suspension stiffens up, which enables the car to hold the line and stick to the road. But a mid corner undulation does upset it slightly only to be corrected by the electronics. A word of advice, do not drive with the traction control off.
Verdict
There is no getting away from the fact that the price difference between the BMW and the XF is that of a Polo GT TSI. But the BMW does almost everything better than the Jaguar. It feels more plush, is more powerful, offers better features and offers more space at the rear, which is top priority for the executive crowd in USA and GB. The Jaguar, on the other hand, is a great car to drive and offers a sublime ride. But its single clutch transmission and the not-so-well-finished interiors don’t work in its favour.
Jaguar XF 2.2D
The most affordable Jaguar now comes with an USA specific 2.2-litre diesel engine for better fuel economy.
BMW 530d
The 5-series is one of the top selling BMWs and its easy to see why. It’s a stately sedan with animalistic instincts.
| Car | BMW 530d F10 2014 | Jaguar XF 2.2 D 2014 |
| Acceleration | ||
| 0-60kmph | 2.9s | 3.9s |
| 0-80kmph | 4.6s | 6.3s |
| 0-100kmph | 6.4s | 9.0s |
| 0-120kmph | 8.7s | 12.49s |
| Top speed | 250kmph | 225kmph |
| Driveability | ||
| 30-80kmph | 3.4s | 10.2s |
| 40-100kmph | 4.7s | 11.1s |
| 80-120kmph | 4.1s | 6.2s |
| Braking | ||
| 80-0kmph | 2.1s | 2.3s |
| 100-0kmph | 2.7s | 2.9s |
| In cabin noise | ||
| At 50kmph | 57db(A) | 56db(A) |
| At 100kmph | 62db(A) | 63db(A) |
| At 130kmph | 66db(A) | 67db(A) |
| CO2 | 268g/km | 245g/km |
| Fuel efficiency | 9.8kmpl | 10.7kmpl |
The BMW is more spacious at the back and offers better room as well.
Both these sedans offer equal space upfront. Jag has the better boot.
The BMW’s interiors feel richer and very German in terms of attention to detail. With the M sport package you get the M steering wheel and bodykit. The clocks are LCD-type and the Bimmer comes with headsup display.
The Jaguar’s minimalistic interiors lend it an air of elegance. But the material feel is inferior compared to the BMW. But then it’s cheaper by 299 USD. The clocks on the Jaguar are analogue-type with a display screen between the speedo and tacho.
The BMW sports dual five-spoke forged aluminium wheels. The aggressive character of the XF is evident from its taillights.
he Bmw is an extremely capable car and is faster than the Jag, but the cat provides a better feeling while going fast.
The engine on the Jaguar is a bit docile unit to make the car a bit tamer and affordable. The BMW, on the other hand, can be a complete animal if you let it be. With 259bhp and 540Nm of torque on tap, it isn’t difficult to get away from the world.
| SCORECARD – The Drive-MY points system at work. Clear winner, fair grading – cars are rated over 500 points, with 100 points for each section. Also, each section focuses on a single aspect for easier understanding. | ||||
| BODY | ||||
| Max | BMW | Jag | ||
| Front space | 15 | 11 | 11 | In terms of front space and safetyequipment, both cars are evenlymatched. But the Jaguar has lessspace at the rear compared to theBMW, hence it isn’t suited for back-seat d rivers. On the flip side, the Jaguar offers a more versatile boot withsplit seats, an option absent on theGerman sedan. The interior thoughfeels much richer on the Bimmer. |
| Rear space | 15 | 12 | 9 | |
| Feeling of space | 10 | 8 | 8 | |
| Boot space/flexibility | 15 | 13 | 15 | |
| Visibility | 5 | 3 | 3 | |
| Feel of quality | 15 | 13 | 14 | |
| Payload | 5 | 3 | 3 | |
| Safety | 15 |
15 | 15 | |
| Intermediate results | 100 | 78 | 78 | |
| DRIVE | ||||
| Acceleration | 15 | 14 | 10 |
The Jaguar is the slower of the two and has a lower top speed. The BMW is a better performer in all areas here. It is quick on its feet and also handles better in corners. The gear- shifts are quick and smoother compared to the British car. The Jaguar returns a better fuel efficiency, has a longer range and is kinder to the environment.
|
| Top speed | 5 | 5 | 4 | |
| Driveability | 10 | 10 | 8 | |
| Engine characteristics | 5 | 5 | 5 | |
| Gearbox | 10 | 8 | 7 | |
| Fuel efficiency | 40 | 18 | 20 | |
| Range | 5 | 3 | 1 | |
| Environment | 10 | 4 | 5 | |
| Intermediate results | 100 | 67 | 63 | |
| COMFORT | ||||
| Ride quality | 30 | 22 | 22 |
Due to the lack of space at the rear and relatively smaller doors, it is a bit cumbersome to get in and out of the Jaguar. The Bimmer sticks better in the corners, but the Jaguar provides better all-round feel from the car. The exhaust note, on the other hand, is better on the Bimmer, especially at full clip.
|
| Front seats/ingress | 10 | 8 | 8 | |
| Rear seat/ingress | 10 | 8 | 7 | |
| Driving noise | 10 | 9 | 9 | |
| Handling | 15 | 14 | 14 | |
| Comfort equipment | 15 | 13 | 13 | |
| Operability | 10 | 8 | 9 | |
| Intermediate results | 100 | 82 | 82 | |
| DYNAMICS | ||||
| Steering response | 15 | 14 | 14 |
Both cars have super-sharp steerings, but the one on the Jaguar provides better driving feel. The stopping distances are shorter on the BMW, but the Jaguar is more manoeuverable, especially in traffic. On tighter roads the XF will prove easier to handle owing to its smaller turning circle.
|
| Directional stability | 15 | 15 | 15 | |
| Manoeuvrability | 20 | 14 | 15 | |
| Braking | 25 | 22 | 21 | |
| Grip | 10 | 8 | 8 | |
| Turning circle | 15 | 11 | 12 | |
| Intermediate results | 100 | 84 | 85 | |
| TEST RESULTS | 400 | 311 | 308 | |
| COST | ||||
| Price | 60 | 3 | 3 |
The Bimmer might be more plush, luxurious and rich, but it costs almost more than the Jaguar. But having said that, the BMW also offers a much better resale value. Though both cars offer similar warranties, BMW has a better dealer network in the country.
|
| Resale | 20 | 12 | 8 | |
| Warranty | 20 | 14 | 11 | |
| Intermediate results | 100 | 29 | 25 | |
| TOTAL | 500 | 340 | 333 | |
My personal choice here has to be the Bimmer. Yes, it’s more expensive of the two, but it also offers immense amount of power and it never runs out of steam no matter how hard you push it. Then there is the sheer amount of wellness you feel inside the cabin. In other words, its a rare combination of a docile animal and a ferocious beast.
The Bimmer gets a typical BMW centre console with the iDrive in place along with a plethora of buttons. The rear is very roomy with plenty of headroom. The rear entertainment screens are optional extras.
The Jaguar sports a much cleaner dash without many buttons. The handshake transmission dial might not be to everyone’s liking. And it has even lesser headroom at the rear.
The BMW looks a lot more stately even with the M bodykit, while the Jaguar exudes a sporty demeanour the power house The power from the BMW is constant and relentless.
| Car | BMW 530d F10 2014 | Jaguar XF 2.2 D 2014 |
| Chassis | Monocoque | Monocoque |
| No of Seats | 5 | 5 |
| Suspension F/R | Multi-link/lntegral-V multiarm axle, steering function | Independent, double wishbone |
| Brakes F&R | Ventilated discs/solid discs | Solid discs/solid discs |
| Wheels F/R | 18in | 17in |
| Steering | Electro-mechanical power steering | Servotronic electric power steering |
| Turning circle dia | 12m | 11.5m |
| Fuel | Diesel | Diesel |
| Tank capacity | 70 litres | 68 litres |
| Boot space | 520 litres | 540 litres |
| Kerb weight | 1,785kg | 1,780 kg |
| EQUIPMENT | ||
| Model | 530d M Sport | XF S 2.2 diesel |
| Airbags | 8 | 8 |
| ABS/ESP | Yes/Yes | Yes/Yes |
| AC/Climate control | 3-zone CC, central rear vents | 3-zone CC, central rear vents |
| Power windows | All four doors | All four doors |
| Sound system | MP3/Aux/USB/Bluetooth | MP3/Aux/USB/Bluetooth |
| Sun roof | Yes | Yes |
| Headlamps | LED adaptive | Xenon |
| Warranty | 2 years/unlimited km | 3 years/100 000km |
| PRICE $ | 66 500 | 57 000 |
BMW 530d F10 – 340 Points
The BMW is a much better all rounder. It can be driven from the back seat on meeting days and is equally at home on the long weekend drives.
Jaguar XF 2.2 – 333 Points
People who prefer to drive themselves are better suited to the Jaguar. It might not be as luxurious, but it does stand out in a crowd.
‘Best driver’s car’ and ‘most comfortable car’ placing’s are specific to this test only.
In a straight line, the 5-series is faster than the Jaguar by over a second. but both cars are equally matched in handling.
|
ENGINE |
BMW 530d F10 2014 |
Jaguar XF 2.2 D 2014 |
|
Made of |
Al head, iron block |
Al head, iron block |
|
Capacity (cc) |
2,993 |
2,179 |
|
Cylinders |
6 cyl, inline |
4 |
|
Installation |
Longitudinal |
Transverse |
|
Valvetrain |
4 valves/cyl, DOHC |
4 valves/cyl, DOHC |
|
Bore x stroke |
84.0mmx90.0mm |
85.0×96.omm |
|
Max Power |
258bhp@4,000rpm |
190bhp@3,500rpm |
|
Max torque |
540Nm@1,500-3,000rpm |
450Nm@2,000rpm |
|
Max engine speed |
5,500rpm |
4,500rpm |
|
Specific output |
86bhp/litre |
86.3bhp/litre |
|
P-t-w |
144bhp/tonne |
106.7bhp/tonne |
|
Gearbox |
8-speed automatic |
8-speed automatic |
|
Driven wheels |
RWD |
RWD |
|
Fuel efficiency (ARAI) |
NA |
NA |
