1960 Jaguar XK vs. 2009 Mazda 5
To start off, 2009 Mazda 5 is newer by 49 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1960 Jaguar XK. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1960 Jaguar XK would be higher. At 3,442 cc (6 cylinders), 1960 Jaguar XK is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1960 Jaguar XK (187 HP @ 5500 RPM) has 34 more horse power than 2009 Mazda 5. (153 HP @ 6500 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 1960 Jaguar XK should accelerate faster than 2009 Mazda 5.
Because 1960 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 1960 Jaguar XK. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2009 Mazda 5, 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. Let's talk about torque, 1960 Jaguar XK (310 Nm @ 2500 RPM) has 109 more torque (in Nm) than 2009 Mazda 5. (201 Nm @ 4500 RPM). This means 1960 Jaguar XK will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2009 Mazda 5.
Compare all specifications:
| 1960 Jaguar XK | 2009 Mazda 5 | |
| Make | Jaguar | Mazda |
| Model | XK | 5 |
| Year Released | 1960 | 2009 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 3442 cc | 2260 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 187 HP | 153 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5500 RPM | 6500 RPM |
| Torque | 310 Nm | 201 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 2500 RPM | 4500 RPM |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 9.0:1 | 10.8:1 |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Number of Seats | 2 seats | 6 seats |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 5 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 4480 mm | 4620 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1650 mm | 1760 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1400 mm | 1640 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2770 mm | 2760 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 11.6 L/100km | 10.2 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 90 L | 60 L |
