1965 Jaguar MK II vs. 2006 Mercury Mariner
To start off, 2006 Mercury Mariner is newer by 41 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1965 Jaguar MK II. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1965 Jaguar MK II would be higher. At 2,483 cc (6 cylinders), 1965 Jaguar MK II is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2006 Mercury Mariner weights approximately 475 kg more than 1965 Jaguar MK II.
Because 2006 Mercury Mariner is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 1965 Jaguar MK II. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2006 Mercury Mariner 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, 1965 Jaguar MK II (195 Nm @ 2000 RPM) has 27 more torque (in Nm) than 2006 Mercury Mariner. (168 Nm @ 4250 RPM). This means 1965 Jaguar MK II will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2006 Mercury Mariner.
Compare all specifications:
| 1965 Jaguar MK II | 2006 Mercury Mariner | |
| Make | Jaguar | Mercury |
| Model | MK II | Mariner |
| Year Released | 1965 | 2006 |
| Body Type | Sedan | SUV |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2483 cc | 2299 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 120 HP | 0 HP |
| Torque | 195 Nm | 168 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 2000 RPM | 4250 RPM |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 8.0:1 | 12.3:1 |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline / Electric Hybrid |
| Drive Type | Rear | 4WD |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1450 kg | 1925 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 5000 mm | 4430 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1860 mm | 1790 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1600 mm | 1790 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2900 mm | 2630 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 11.6 L/100km | 7.6 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 63 L | 57 L |
