1968 Austin A 60 vs. 2002 Jaguar XJ
To start off, 2002 Jaguar XJ is newer by 34 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1968 Austin A 60. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1968 Austin A 60 would be higher. At 4,196 cc (8 cylinders), 2002 Jaguar XJ is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2002 Jaguar XJ (301 HP) has 241 more horse power than 1968 Austin A 60. (60 HP) In normal driving conditions, 2002 Jaguar XJ should accelerate faster than 1968 Austin A 60. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2002 Jaguar XJ weights approximately 678 kg more than 1968 Austin A 60. 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. Let's talk about torque, 2002 Jaguar XJ (541 Nm) has 419 more torque (in Nm) than 1968 Austin A 60. (122 Nm). This means 2002 Jaguar XJ will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1968 Austin A 60.
Compare all specifications:
| 1968 Austin A 60 | 2002 Jaguar XJ | |
| Make | Austin | Jaguar |
| Model | A 60 | XJ |
| Year Released | 1968 | 2002 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1622 cc | 4196 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Horse Power | 60 HP | 301 HP |
| Torque | 122 Nm | 541 Nm |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 4 seats |
| Vehicle Weight | 1122 kg | 1800 kg |
| Wheelbase Size | 2550 mm | 3040 mm |
