1966 DAF Daffodil vs. 2009 Jaguar XF
To start off, 2009 Jaguar XF is newer by 43 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 2,720 cc (6 cylinders), 2009 Jaguar XF is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2009 Jaguar XF (204 HP @ 4000 RPM) has 178 more horse power than 1966 DAF Daffodil. (26 HP @ 4000 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2009 Jaguar XF should accelerate faster than 1966 DAF Daffodil. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2009 Jaguar XF weights approximately 1105 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 | 2009 Jaguar XF | |
Make | DAF | Jaguar |
Model | Daffodil | XF |
Year Released | 1966 | 2009 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 746 cc | 2720 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 2 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | V |
Horse Power | 26 HP | 204 HP |
Engine RPM | 4000 RPM | 4000 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Diesel |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Vehicle Weight | 666 kg | 1771 kg |
Vehicle Length | 3620 mm | 4970 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1450 mm | 1880 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1380 mm | 1470 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2060 mm | 2920 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 33 L | 69 L |