1998 Jaguar XK vs. 2001 Mazda CU-X

To start off, 2001 Mazda CU-X is newer by 3 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1998 Jaguar XK. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1998 Jaguar XK would be higher. At 3,996 cc (8 cylinders), 1998 Jaguar XK is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1998 Jaguar XK (290 HP @ 6100 RPM) has 191 more horse power than 2001 Mazda CU-X. (99 HP @ 4000 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 1998 Jaguar XK should accelerate faster than 2001 Mazda CU-X. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1998 Jaguar XK weights approximately 355 kg more than 2001 Mazda CU-X. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.

Because 1998 Jaguar XK 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 1998 Jaguar XK. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2001 Mazda CU-X, 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, 1998 Jaguar XK (394 Nm) has 154 more torque (in Nm) than 2001 Mazda CU-X. (240 Nm). This means 1998 Jaguar XK will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2001 Mazda CU-X.

Compare all specifications: