1952 Jaguar XK vs. 2003 Mitsubishi eK
To start off, 2003 Mitsubishi eK 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. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1952 Jaguar XK weights approximately 505 kg more than 2003 Mitsubishi eK.
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, 2003 Mitsubishi eK, 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 | 2003 Mitsubishi eK | |
| Make | Jaguar | Mitsubishi |
| Model | XK | eK |
| Year Released | 1952 | 2003 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 3441 cc | 656 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 3 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 158 HP | 0 HP |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Number of Seats | 2 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 5 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1295 kg | 790 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4430 mm | 3400 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1570 mm | 1480 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1340 mm | 1560 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2600 mm | 2350 mm |
