1995 Jaguar XJS vs. 2010 Mazda 3
To start off, 2010 Mazda 3 is newer by 15 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1995 Jaguar XJS. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1995 Jaguar XJS would be higher. At 3,980 cc (6 cylinders), 1995 Jaguar XJS is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1995 Jaguar XJS (222 HP) has 55 more horse power than 2010 Mazda 3. (167 HP). In normal driving conditions, 1995 Jaguar XJS should accelerate faster than 2010 Mazda 3.
Because 1995 Jaguar XJS 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 1995 Jaguar XJS. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2010 Mazda 3, 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.
Compare all specifications:
1995 Jaguar XJS | 2010 Mazda 3 | |
Make | Jaguar | Mazda |
Model | XJS | 3 |
Year Released | 1995 | 2010 |
Body Type | Convertible | Sedan |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 3980 cc | 2500 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 222 HP | 167 HP |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
Number of Seats | 4 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 2 doors | 4 doors |
Vehicle Length | 4770 mm | 4506 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1800 mm | 1755 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1260 mm | 1471 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2600 mm | 2639 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 82 L | 60 L |