1966 DAF Daffodil vs. 2005 Jaguar XJ
To start off, 2005 Jaguar XJ is newer by 39 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1966 DAF Daffodil. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1966 DAF Daffodil would be higher. At 4,196 cc (8 cylinders), 2005 Jaguar XJ is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2005 Jaguar XJ (294 HP @ 6100 RPM) has 268 more horse power than 1966 DAF Daffodil. (26 HP @ 4000 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2005 Jaguar XJ should accelerate faster than 1966 DAF Daffodil. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2005 Jaguar XJ weights approximately 1128 kg more than 1966 DAF Daffodil. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
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.
Compare all specifications:
| 1966 DAF Daffodil | 2005 Jaguar XJ | |
| Make | DAF | Jaguar |
| Model | Daffodil | XJ |
| Year Released | 1966 | 2005 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 746 cc | 4196 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 2 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Horse Power | 26 HP | 294 HP |
| Engine RPM | 4000 RPM | 6100 RPM |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Vehicle Weight | 666 kg | 1794 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 3620 mm | 5220 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1450 mm | 1950 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1380 mm | 1460 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2060 mm | 3040 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 33 L | 85 L |
