Jaguar F-Pace vs. Audi Q5: Experts Find The Q5 To Be Faster & More Comfortable While F-Pace Offers Better Driving Experience

Mar 21, 2017 04:20 AM EDT | Gerone Trish

The Audi Q5 S line was the model used in this comparative report against Jaguar F-Pace R-Sport. Both have a 2.0d engine and closely priced at $49, 715 (£40,220) for the former and $51,088 (£41,330) for the latter. Experts say the former offers better speed and interiors while the latter offers better driving experience.

The Audi Q5 sports the Quattro four-wheel drive system and S-Tronic dual-clutch auto gearbox. Whereas the Jaguar F-Pace R-Sport sports the 2.0-liter diesel all-wheel drive system.

The Audi Q5 has an acceleration rate of 8.2 seconds from 0-60 mph. The Jaguar F-Pace could not match the Q5 as it only accelerated 0-60 mph in 9.4 seconds.

Shifting gears with the Audi Q5 is quite short. Q5 Steering is also slower compared to the Jaguar F-Pace.

On a curved back road, a grip is efficient with the F-Pace which can hustle through corners. This model has outsmarted the Q5 with greater confidence. In addition, the former has excellent body control.

In terms of driving experience, the F-Pace offers well-controlled driving and very minimal road and wind noise. Whereas the Q5 does not provide comfortable driving experience with its noisier motors,  has reviewed.

In another review, the Audi Q5 offers fuel economy. Unlike the Jaguar F-Pace which offers no fuel economy, the Q5 can do 20 mpg in the city and 28 mpg on the highway.

On the inside, the Q5 has bigger space for passengers than the F-Pace. The former has 41-inch front leg room while the latter appears smaller with 40.3-inch. The second head room for the former is 39 inches while the latter only has 37.5 inches. Moreover, the second shoulder room for the former is 56.4 inches while the latter also comes short with 55.8 inches.

However, the F-Pace offers bigger cargo space than the Q5. The former has consistent 33.5 cu-ft cargo volume to seat 1, 2 or 3 passengers. Whereas, the latter has varying cargo dimensions as 57.3 cu-ft to seat 1, or 29.1 cu-ft to seat 2 and 3.

For more comprehensive details, check out the complete comparative table on the report of .

© 2017 Auto World News, All rights reserved. Do not reproduce without permission.
Get the Most Popular Autoworld Stories in a Weekly Newsletter

Join the Conversation

Real Time Analytics