1952 Jaguar XK vs. 1998 Volkswagen Polo
To start off, 1998 Volkswagen Polo is newer by 46 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.
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, 1998 Volkswagen Polo, 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.
Compare all specifications:
1952 Jaguar XK | 1998 Volkswagen Polo | |
Make | Jaguar | Volkswagen |
Model | XK | Polo |
Year Released | 1952 | 1998 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 3441 cc | 1895 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 158 HP | 0 HP |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Diesel |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Number of Seats | 2 seats | 5 seats |
Vehicle Length | 4430 mm | 4150 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1570 mm | 1650 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1340 mm | 1440 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2600 mm | 2410 mm |