1950 Jaguar XK vs. 2009 Mazda CX-9
To start off, 2009 Mazda CX-9 is newer by 59 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1950 Jaguar XK. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1950 Jaguar XK would be higher. At 3,725 cc (6 cylinders), 2009 Mazda CX-9 is equipped with a bigger engine.
Because 2009 Mazda CX-9 is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 1950 Jaguar XK. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2009 Mazda CX-9 will offer significantly more control. With that said, do keep in mind that many other factors such as speed and the wear on your tires can also have significant impact on traction and control.
Compare all specifications:
| 1950 Jaguar XK | 2009 Mazda CX-9 | |
| Make | Jaguar | Mazda |
| Model | XK | CX-9 |
| Year Released | 1950 | 2009 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1995 cc | 3725 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 0 HP | 273 HP |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | 4WD |
| Number of Seats | 2 seats | 7 seats |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 5 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 4430 mm | 5080 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1570 mm | 1940 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1360 mm | 1730 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2600 mm | 2880 mm |
