1968 Austin 3-Litre vs. 2010 Jaguar XF
To start off, 2010 Jaguar XF is newer by 42 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1968 Austin 3-Litre. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1968 Austin 3-Litre would be higher. At 2,912 cc (6 cylinders), 1968 Austin 3-Litre is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2010 Jaguar XF (187 HP) has 63 more horse power than 1968 Austin 3-Litre. (124 HP) In normal driving conditions, 2010 Jaguar XF should accelerate faster than 1968 Austin 3-Litre.
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 (450 Nm) has 231 more torque (in Nm) than 1968 Austin 3-Litre. (219 Nm). This means 2010 Jaguar XF will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1968 Austin 3-Litre.
Compare all specifications:
| 1968 Austin 3-Litre | 2010 Jaguar XF | |
| Make | Austin | Jaguar |
| Model | 3-Litre | XF |
| Year Released | 1968 | 2010 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2912 cc | 2200 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 124 HP | 187 HP |
| Torque | 219 Nm | 450 Nm |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Diesel |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 4720 mm | 4961 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1700 mm | 1877 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1450 mm | 1461 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2940 mm | 2908 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 65 L | 70 L |
