1968 Jaguar 240 vs. 2012 Toyota Matrix
To start off, 2012 Toyota Matrix is newer by 44 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1968 Jaguar 240. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1968 Jaguar 240 would be higher. At 2,483 cc (6 cylinders), 1968 Jaguar 240 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2012 Toyota Matrix (158 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 27 more horse power than 1968 Jaguar 240. (131 HP @ 5550 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2012 Toyota Matrix should accelerate faster than 1968 Jaguar 240.
Because 1968 Jaguar 240 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 1968 Jaguar 240. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2012 Toyota Matrix, 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, 2012 Toyota Matrix (219 Nm @ 4000 RPM) has 15 more torque (in Nm) than 1968 Jaguar 240. (204 Nm @ 3700 RPM). This means 2012 Toyota Matrix will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1968 Jaguar 240.
Compare all specifications:
| 1968 Jaguar 240 | 2012 Toyota Matrix | |
| Make | Jaguar | Toyota |
| Model | 240 | Matrix |
| Year Released | 1968 | 2012 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2483 cc | 2400 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 131 HP | 158 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5550 RPM | 6000 RPM |
| Torque | 204 Nm | 219 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 3700 RPM | 4000 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 5 doors |
| Vehicle Width | 1700 mm | 1765 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1470 mm | 1549 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2740 mm | 2601 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 54 L | 50 L |
