1996 Jaguar XJS vs. 2005 Volkswagen Polo
To start off, 2005 Volkswagen Polo is newer by 9 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1996 Jaguar XJS. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1996 Jaguar XJS would be higher. At 3,978 cc (6 cylinders), 1996 Jaguar XJS is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1996 Jaguar XJS (222 HP) has 139 more horse power than 2005 Volkswagen Polo. (83 HP). In normal driving conditions, 1996 Jaguar XJS should accelerate faster than 2005 Volkswagen Polo.
Because 1996 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 1996 Jaguar XJS. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2005 Volkswagen Polo, 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:
1996 Jaguar XJS | 2005 Volkswagen Polo | |
Make | Jaguar | Volkswagen |
Model | XJS | Polo |
Year Released | 1996 | 2005 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 3978 cc | 1423 cc |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 2 valves |
Horse Power | 222 HP | 83 HP |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
Number of Seats | 4 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 2 doors | 4 doors |
Wheelbase Size | 2600 mm | 2410 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 82 L | 45 L |