1966 Jaguar E-Type vs. 2013 Mini Cooper
To start off, 2013 Mini Cooper is newer by 47 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1966 Jaguar E-Type. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1966 Jaguar E-Type would be higher. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2013 Mini Cooper weights approximately 20 kg more than 1966 Jaguar E-Type.
Because 1966 Jaguar E-Type 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 1966 Jaguar E-Type. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2013 Mini Cooper, 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. Let's talk about torque, 1966 Jaguar E-Type (385 Nm @ 4000 RPM) has 225 more torque (in Nm) than 2013 Mini Cooper. (160 Nm @ 4250 RPM). This means 1966 Jaguar E-Type will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2013 Mini Cooper.
Compare all specifications:
1966 Jaguar E-Type | 2013 Mini Cooper | |
Make | Jaguar | Mini |
Model | E-Type | Cooper |
Year Released | 1966 | 2013 |
Body Type | Coupe | Station Wagon |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 265 HP | 0 HP |
Engine RPM | 5400 RPM | 6000 RPM |
Torque | 385 Nm | 160 Nm |
Torque RPM | 4000 RPM | 4250 RPM |
Engine Bore Size | 92.1 mm | 77 mm |
Engine Stroke Size | 106 mm | 85 mm |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Transmission Type | Manual | 6-speed manual |
Number of Doors | 2 doors | 5 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 1245 kg | 1265 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4690 mm | 3961 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1660 mm | 1892 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1280 mm | 1426 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2670 mm | 2547 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 63 L | 50 L |