1993 Jaguar XJ220 vs. 2008 Mazda 6
To start off, 2008 Mazda 6 is newer by 15 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1993 Jaguar XJ220. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1993 Jaguar XJ220 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 394 more horse power than 2008 Mazda 6. (148 HP @ 6500 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 1993 Jaguar XJ220 should accelerate faster than 2008 Mazda 6.
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, 2008 Mazda 6, 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 458 more torque (in Nm) than 2008 Mazda 6. (184 Nm @ 3400 RPM). This means 1993 Jaguar XJ220 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2008 Mazda 6.
Compare all specifications:
1993 Jaguar XJ220 | 2008 Mazda 6 | |
Make | Jaguar | Mazda |
Model | XJ220 | 6 |
Year Released | 1993 | 2008 |
Body Type | Coupe | Sedan |
Engine Position | Middle | Front |
Engine Size | 3498 cc | 1999 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 542 HP | 148 HP |
Engine RPM | 7000 RPM | 6500 RPM |
Torque | 642 Nm | 184 Nm |
Torque RPM | 4500 RPM | 3400 RPM |
Engine Compression Ratio | 8.3:1 | 10.8:1 |
Top Speed | 349 km/hour | 211 km/hour |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
Number of Seats | 2 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 2 doors | 4 doors |
Vehicle Height | 340 mm | 1790 mm |