1952 Jaguar XK vs. 1980 Oldsmobile Cutlass
To start off, 1980 Oldsmobile Cutlass is newer by 28 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1952 Jaguar XK. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1952 Jaguar XK would be higher. At 4,343 cc (8 cylinders), 1980 Oldsmobile Cutlass is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1952 Jaguar XK (158 HP @ 5000 RPM) has 38 more horse power than 1980 Oldsmobile Cutlass. (120 HP @ 3600 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 1952 Jaguar XK should accelerate faster than 1980 Oldsmobile Cutlass. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1980 Oldsmobile Cutlass weights approximately 191 kg more than 1952 Jaguar XK.
Both vehicles are rear wheel drive (RWD) - it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, both vehicles do the job better than front wheel drive vehicles. 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. Let's talk about torque, 1980 Oldsmobile Cutlass (305 Nm) has 15 more torque (in Nm) than 1952 Jaguar XK. (290 Nm). This means 1980 Oldsmobile Cutlass will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1952 Jaguar XK.
Compare all specifications:
| 1952 Jaguar XK | 1980 Oldsmobile Cutlass | |
| Make | Jaguar | Oldsmobile |
| Model | XK | Cutlass |
| Year Released | 1952 | 1980 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 3441 cc | 4343 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Horse Power | 158 HP | 120 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5000 RPM | 3600 RPM |
| Torque | 290 Nm | 305 Nm |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Number of Seats | 2 seats | 4 seats |
| Vehicle Weight | 1295 kg | 1486 kg |
| Wheelbase Size | 2600 mm | 2750 mm |
