1962 Jaguar MK II vs. 2010 Nissan X-Trail
To start off, 2010 Nissan X-Trail is newer by 48 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1962 Jaguar MK II. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1962 Jaguar MK II would be higher. At 2,483 cc (6 cylinders), 1962 Jaguar MK II is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2010 Nissan X-Trail (148 HP) has 28 more horse power than 1962 Jaguar MK II. (120 HP) In normal driving conditions, 2010 Nissan X-Trail should accelerate faster than 1962 Jaguar MK II.
Because 2010 Nissan X-Trail is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 1962 Jaguar MK II. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2010 Nissan X-Trail 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.
Compare all specifications:
| 1962 Jaguar MK II | 2010 Nissan X-Trail | |
| Make | Jaguar | Nissan |
| Model | MK II | X-Trail |
| Year Released | 1962 | 2010 |
| Body Type | Sedan | SUV |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2483 cc | 1995 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 120 HP | 148 HP |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Diesel |
| Drive Type | Rear | 4WD |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 5 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 5000 mm | 4640 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1860 mm | 1790 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1600 mm | 1690 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2900 mm | 2640 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 11.6 L/100km | 8.7 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 90 L | 65 L |
