1964 Jaguar MK 10 vs. 2003 Ford Ecosport
To start off, 2003 Ford Ecosport is newer by 39 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1964 Jaguar MK 10. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1964 Jaguar MK 10 would be higher. At 4,235 cc (6 cylinders), 1964 Jaguar MK 10 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1964 Jaguar MK 10 (265 HP) has 171 more horse power than 2003 Ford Ecosport. (94 HP). In normal driving conditions, 1964 Jaguar MK 10 should accelerate faster than 2003 Ford Ecosport.
Because 1964 Jaguar MK 10 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 1964 Jaguar MK 10. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2003 Ford Ecosport, 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. 1964 Jaguar MK 10 has automatic transmission and 2003 Ford Ecosport has manual transmission. 2003 Ford Ecosport will offer better control over acceleration and deceleration in addition to better fuel efficiency overall. 1964 Jaguar MK 10 will be easier to drive especially in heavy traffic.
Compare all specifications:
1964 Jaguar MK 10 | 2003 Ford Ecosport | |
Make | Jaguar | Ford |
Model | MK 10 | Ecosport |
Year Released | 1964 | 2003 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 4235 cc | 1000 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 265 HP | 94 HP |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Transmission Type | Automatic | Manual |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 5 doors |
Vehicle Length | 5140 mm | 4228 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1940 mm | 1980 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1400 mm | 1679 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 3050 mm | 2490 mm |