1952 Jaguar XK vs. 1996 Mitsubishi FTO
To start off, 1996 Mitsubishi FTO is newer by 44 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 3,441 cc (6 cylinders), 1952 Jaguar XK is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1996 Mitsubishi FTO (195 HP) has 37 more horse power than 1952 Jaguar XK. (158 HP) In normal driving conditions, 1996 Mitsubishi FTO should accelerate faster than 1952 Jaguar XK.
Because 1952 Jaguar XK is rear wheel drive (RWD), it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, it will be much easier to do with 1952 Jaguar XK. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1996 Mitsubishi FTO, being front wheel drive (FWD), will offer much better control with better grip. 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, 1952 Jaguar XK (290 Nm) has 88 more torque (in Nm) than 1996 Mitsubishi FTO. (202 Nm). This means 1952 Jaguar XK will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1996 Mitsubishi FTO.
Compare all specifications:
1952 Jaguar XK | 1996 Mitsubishi FTO | |
Make | Jaguar | Mitsubishi |
Model | XK | FTO |
Year Released | 1952 | 1996 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 3441 cc | 1998 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | V |
Horse Power | 158 HP | 195 HP |
Torque | 290 Nm | 202 Nm |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Top Speed | 201 km/hour | 226 km/hour |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Number of Doors | 2 doors | 2 doors |
Vehicle Length | 4430 mm | 4320 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1570 mm | 1730 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1340 mm | 1300 mm |