1982 Ford Thunderbird vs. 2009 Jaguar XF
To start off, 2009 Jaguar XF is newer by 27 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1982 Ford Thunderbird. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1982 Ford Thunderbird would be higher. At 4,196 cc (8 cylinders), 2009 Jaguar XF is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2009 Jaguar XF (420 HP @ 6250 RPM) has 333 more horse power than 1982 Ford Thunderbird. (87 HP @ 3800 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2009 Jaguar XF should accelerate faster than 1982 Ford Thunderbird.
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, 2009 Jaguar XF (560 Nm @ 4000 RPM) has 351 more torque (in Nm) than 1982 Ford Thunderbird. (209 Nm @ 1400 RPM). This means 2009 Jaguar XF will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1982 Ford Thunderbird.
Compare all specifications:
1982 Ford Thunderbird | 2009 Jaguar XF | |
Make | Ford | Jaguar |
Model | Thunderbird | XF |
Year Released | 1982 | 2009 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 3275 cc | 4196 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | V |
Horse Power | 87 HP | 420 HP |
Engine RPM | 3800 RPM | 6250 RPM |
Torque | 209 Nm | 560 Nm |
Torque RPM | 1400 RPM | 4000 RPM |
Engine Compression Ratio | 8.6:1 | 9.1:1 |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Transmission Type | Automatic | Automatic |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 2 doors | 4 doors |
Vehicle Length | 5100 mm | 4970 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1890 mm | 1880 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1350 mm | 1470 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2760 mm | 2910 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 80 L | 70 L |