1983 Ford Tempo vs. 1993 Jaguar XJ
To start off, 1993 Jaguar XJ is newer by 10 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1983 Ford Tempo. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1983 Ford Tempo would be higher. At 5,993 cc (12 cylinders), 1993 Jaguar XJ is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1993 Jaguar XJ (318 HP @ 5400 RPM) has 229 more horse power than 1983 Ford Tempo. (89 HP @ 4700 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 1993 Jaguar XJ should accelerate faster than 1983 Ford Tempo.
Because 1993 Jaguar XJ 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 XJ. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1983 Ford Tempo, 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 XJ (464 Nm @ 3750 RPM) has 294 more torque (in Nm) than 1983 Ford Tempo. (170 Nm @ 2700 RPM). This means 1993 Jaguar XJ will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1983 Ford Tempo.
Compare all specifications:
1983 Ford Tempo | 1993 Jaguar XJ | |
Make | Ford | Jaguar |
Model | Tempo | XJ |
Year Released | 1983 | 1993 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 2307 cc | 5993 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 12 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | V |
Horse Power | 89 HP | 318 HP |
Engine RPM | 4700 RPM | 5400 RPM |
Torque | 170 Nm | 464 Nm |
Torque RPM | 2700 RPM | 3750 RPM |
Engine Bore Size | 96 mm | 90 mm |
Engine Stroke Size | 79.5 mm | 78.5 mm |
Drive Type | Front | Rear |
Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
Vehicle Length | 4480 mm | 4990 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1690 mm | 1800 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1340 mm | 1110 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2540 mm | 2880 mm |