1952 Jaguar XK vs. 2001 Ford Econovan
To start off, 2001 Ford Econovan is newer by 49 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, 1952 Jaguar XK (158 HP @ 5000 RPM) has 62 more horse power than 2001 Ford Econovan. (96 HP @ 4800 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 1952 Jaguar XK should accelerate faster than 2001 Ford Econovan. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2001 Ford Econovan weights approximately 150 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, 1952 Jaguar XK (290 Nm @ 2500 RPM) has 135 more torque (in Nm) than 2001 Ford Econovan. (155 Nm @ 2500 RPM). This means 1952 Jaguar XK will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2001 Ford Econovan.
Compare all specifications:
1952 Jaguar XK | 2001 Ford Econovan | |
Make | Jaguar | Ford |
Model | XK | Econovan |
Year Released | 1952 | 2001 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 3441 cc | 1996 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 2 valves |
Horse Power | 158 HP | 96 HP |
Engine RPM | 5000 RPM | 4800 RPM |
Torque | 290 Nm | 155 Nm |
Torque RPM | 2500 RPM | 2500 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Vehicle Weight | 1295 kg | 1445 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4430 mm | 4290 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1570 mm | 1640 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1340 mm | 1870 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2600 mm | 2210 mm |