1968 Austin 3-Litre vs. 2012 Jaguar XF
To start off, 2012 Jaguar XF is newer by 44 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 3,000 cc (6 cylinders), 2012 Jaguar XF is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2012 Jaguar XF (237 HP) has 113 more horse power than 1968 Austin 3-Litre. (124 HP) In normal driving conditions, 2012 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, 2012 Jaguar XF (500 Nm) has 281 more torque (in Nm) than 1968 Austin 3-Litre. (219 Nm). This means 2012 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 | 2012 Jaguar XF | |
Make | Austin | Jaguar |
Model | 3-Litre | XF |
Year Released | 1968 | 2012 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 2912 cc | 3000 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | V |
Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 124 HP | 237 HP |
Torque | 219 Nm | 500 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 |