1961 Jaguar MK X vs. 2008 Mazda CX-9
To start off, 2008 Mazda CX-9 is newer by 47 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1961 Jaguar MK X. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1961 Jaguar MK X would be higher. At 4,235 cc (6 cylinders), 1961 Jaguar MK X is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2008 Mazda CX-9 (270 HP @ 6250 RPM) has 9 more horse power than 1961 Jaguar MK X. (261 HP @ 5400 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2008 Mazda CX-9 should accelerate faster than 1961 Jaguar MK X. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1961 Jaguar MK X weights approximately 581 kg more than 2008 Mazda CX-9.
Because 2008 Mazda CX-9 is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 1961 Jaguar MK X. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2008 Mazda CX-9 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, 1961 Jaguar MK X (390 Nm @ 5400 RPM) has 20 more torque (in Nm) than 2008 Mazda CX-9. (370 Nm @ 4500 RPM). This means 1961 Jaguar MK X will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2008 Mazda CX-9.
Compare all specifications:
| 1961 Jaguar MK X | 2008 Mazda CX-9 | |
| Make | Jaguar | Mazda |
| Model | MK X | CX-9 |
| Year Released | 1961 | 2008 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 4235 cc | 3725 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Horse Power | 261 HP | 270 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5400 RPM | 6250 RPM |
| Torque | 390 Nm | 370 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 5400 RPM | 4500 RPM |
| Drive Type | Rear | 4WD |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 5 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1910 kg | 1329 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 5130 mm | 5080 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1930 mm | 1940 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1390 mm | 1730 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2900 mm | 2880 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 11.8 L/100km | 13.1 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 63 L | 76 L |
