2000 Chevrolet Camaro vs. 1966 Jaguar MK II
To start off, 2000 Chevrolet Camaro is newer by 34 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1966 Jaguar MK II. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1966 Jaguar MK II would be higher. At 5,670 cc (8 cylinders), 2000 Chevrolet Camaro is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2000 Chevrolet Camaro weights approximately 88 kg more than 1966 Jaguar MK II.
Both vehicles are rear wheel drive (RWD) - it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, both vehicles do the job better than front wheel drive vehicles. 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, 2000 Chevrolet Camaro (468 Nm) has 273 more torque (in Nm) than 1966 Jaguar MK II. (195 Nm). This means 2000 Chevrolet Camaro will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1966 Jaguar MK II.
Compare all specifications:
| 2000 Chevrolet Camaro | 1966 Jaguar MK II | |
| Make | Chevrolet | Jaguar |
| Model | Camaro | MK II |
| Year Released | 2000 | 1966 |
| Body Type | Coupe | Sedan |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 5670 cc | 2483 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Horse Power | 0 HP | 120 HP |
| Torque | 468 Nm | 195 Nm |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Number of Seats | 4 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1540 kg | 1452 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4910 mm | 5000 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1890 mm | 1860 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1330 mm | 1600 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2570 mm | 2900 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 57 L | 63 L |
