1964 Triumph Spitfire vs. 2010 Jaguar XF
To start off, 2010 Jaguar XF is newer by 46 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1964 Triumph Spitfire. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1964 Triumph Spitfire would be higher. At 3,000 cc (6 cylinders), 2010 Jaguar XF is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2010 Jaguar XF (271 HP) has 209 more horse power than 1964 Triumph Spitfire. (62 HP) In normal driving conditions, 2010 Jaguar XF should accelerate faster than 1964 Triumph Spitfire.
Both vehicles are rear wheel drive (RWD) - it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, both vehicles do the job better than front wheel drive vehicles. 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 Jaguar XF (600 Nm) has 509 more torque (in Nm) than 1964 Triumph Spitfire. (91 Nm). This means 2010 Jaguar XF will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1964 Triumph Spitfire.
Compare all specifications:
| 1964 Triumph Spitfire | 2010 Jaguar XF | |
| Make | Triumph | Jaguar |
| Model | Spitfire | XF |
| Year Released | 1964 | 2010 |
| Body Type | Convertible | Sedan |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1147 cc | 3000 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 62 HP | 271 HP |
| Torque | 91 Nm | 600 Nm |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Diesel |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Number of Seats | 2 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 3690 mm | 4961 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1450 mm | 1877 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1210 mm | 1461 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2110 mm | 2908 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 40 L | 70 L |
