1952 Jaguar XK vs. 2010 BMW 320
To start off, 2010 BMW 320 is newer by 58 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, 2010 BMW 320 (182 HP @ 4000 RPM) has 24 more horse power than 1952 Jaguar XK. (158 HP @ 5000 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2010 BMW 320 should accelerate faster 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, 2010 BMW 320 (380 Nm @ 2750 RPM) has 90 more torque (in Nm) than 1952 Jaguar XK. (290 Nm @ 2500 RPM). This means 2010 BMW 320 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1952 Jaguar XK.
Compare all specifications:
1952 Jaguar XK | 2010 BMW 320 | |
Make | Jaguar | BMW |
Model | XK | 320 |
Year Released | 1952 | 2010 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 3441 cc | 1995 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 158 HP | 182 HP |
Engine RPM | 5000 RPM | 4000 RPM |
Torque | 290 Nm | 380 Nm |
Torque RPM | 2500 RPM | 2750 RPM |
Engine Bore Size | 83 mm | 90 mm |
Engine Stroke Size | 106 mm | 84 mm |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Diesel |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Number of Seats | 2 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 2 doors | 2 doors |
Vehicle Length | 4430 mm | 4624 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1570 mm | 1811 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1340 mm | 1384 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2600 mm | 2810 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 63 L | 57 L |