1952 Jaguar XK vs. 2010 Mazda BT-50
To start off, 2010 Mazda BT-50 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, 1952 Jaguar XK (158 HP @ 5000 RPM) has 4 more horse power than 2010 Mazda BT-50. (154 HP @ 3200 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 1952 Jaguar XK should accelerate faster than 2010 Mazda BT-50.
Because 2010 Mazda BT-50 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, 2010 Mazda BT-50 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. Let's talk about torque, 2010 Mazda BT-50 (380 Nm @ 180 RPM) has 90 more torque (in Nm) than 1952 Jaguar XK. (290 Nm @ 2500 RPM). This means 2010 Mazda BT-50 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1952 Jaguar XK.
Compare all specifications:
| 1952 Jaguar XK | 2010 Mazda BT-50 | |
| Make | Jaguar | Mazda |
| Model | XK | BT-50 |
| Year Released | 1952 | 2010 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 3441 cc | 2953 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 158 HP | 154 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5000 RPM | 3200 RPM |
| Torque | 290 Nm | 380 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 2500 RPM | 180 RPM |
| Engine Bore Size | 83 mm | 96.1 mm |
| Engine Stroke Size | 106 mm | 102 mm |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | 4WD |
| Number of Seats | 2 seats | 2 seats |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 2 doors |
| Vehicle Height | 1340 mm | 1810 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2600 mm | 3010 mm |
