1982 Austin Allegro vs. 1993 Jaguar XJ220
To start off, 1993 Jaguar XJ220 is newer by 11 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1982 Austin Allegro. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1982 Austin Allegro would be higher. At 3,498 cc (6 cylinders), 1993 Jaguar XJ220 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1993 Jaguar XJ220 (542 HP @ 7000 RPM) has 498 more horse power than 1982 Austin Allegro. (44 HP @ 5250 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 1993 Jaguar XJ220 should accelerate faster than 1982 Austin Allegro.
Because 1993 Jaguar XJ220 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 1993 Jaguar XJ220. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1982 Austin Allegro, 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, 1993 Jaguar XJ220 (642 Nm @ 4500 RPM) has 572 more torque (in Nm) than 1982 Austin Allegro. (70 Nm @ 3000 RPM). This means 1993 Jaguar XJ220 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1982 Austin Allegro.
Compare all specifications:
| 1982 Austin Allegro | 1993 Jaguar XJ220 | |
| Make | Austin | Jaguar |
| Model | Allegro | XJ220 |
| Year Released | 1982 | 1993 |
| Engine Position | Front | Middle |
| Engine Size | 998 cc | 3498 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Horse Power | 44 HP | 542 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5250 RPM | 7000 RPM |
| Torque | 70 Nm | 642 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 3000 RPM | 4500 RPM |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 9.6:1 | 8.3:1 |
| Drive Type | Front | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 2 seats |
| Vehicle Height | 1400 mm | 340 mm |
