1952 Jaguar XK vs. 2003 Ford Ecosport
To start off, 2003 Ford Ecosport is newer by 51 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) has 15 more horse power than 2003 Ford Ecosport. (143 HP). In normal driving conditions, 1952 Jaguar XK should accelerate faster than 2003 Ford Ecosport.
Because 2003 Ford Ecosport is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 1952 Jaguar XK. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2003 Ford Ecosport 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:
1952 Jaguar XK | 2003 Ford Ecosport | |
Make | Jaguar | Ford |
Model | XK | Ecosport |
Year Released | 1952 | 2003 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 3441 cc | 2000 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 158 HP | 143 HP |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | 4WD |
Number of Seats | 2 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 2 doors | 5 doors |
Vehicle Length | 4430 mm | 4228 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1570 mm | 1980 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1340 mm | 1679 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2600 mm | 2490 mm |