1999 Mercury Villager vs. 2010 Jaguar XF
To start off, 2010 Jaguar XF is newer by 11 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1999 Mercury Villager. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1999 Mercury Villager would be higher. At 3,276 cc (6 cylinders), 1999 Mercury Villager is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2010 Jaguar XF (271 HP) has 102 more horse power than 1999 Mercury Villager. (169 HP) In normal driving conditions, 2010 Jaguar XF should accelerate faster than 1999 Mercury Villager.
Because 2010 Jaguar XF 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 2010 Jaguar XF. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1999 Mercury Villager, 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, 2010 Jaguar XF (600 Nm) has 329 more torque (in Nm) than 1999 Mercury Villager. (271 Nm). This means 2010 Jaguar XF will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1999 Mercury Villager.
Compare all specifications:
1999 Mercury Villager | 2010 Jaguar XF | |
Make | Mercury | Jaguar |
Model | Villager | XF |
Year Released | 1999 | 2010 |
Body Type | Minivan | Sedan |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 3276 cc | 3000 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | V |
Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 169 HP | 271 HP |
Torque | 271 Nm | 600 Nm |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Diesel |
Drive Type | Front | Rear |
Transmission Type | Automatic | 6-speed shiftable automatic |
Vehicle Length | 4950 mm | 4961 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1910 mm | 1877 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1790 mm | 1461 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2860 mm | 2908 mm |