2000 Ford Artic vs. 1952 Jaguar XK
To start off, 2000 Ford Artic is newer by 48 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1952 Jaguar XK. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1952 Jaguar XK would be higher. At 3,998 cc (6 cylinders), 2000 Ford Artic is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1952 Jaguar XK (158 HP @ 5000 RPM) has 30 more horse power than 2000 Ford Artic. (128 HP @ 6250 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 1952 Jaguar XK should accelerate faster than 2000 Ford Artic. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2000 Ford Artic weights approximately 3 kg more than 1952 Jaguar XK.
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 Ford Artic (325 Nm) has 35 more torque (in Nm) than 1952 Jaguar XK. (290 Nm). This means 2000 Ford Artic will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1952 Jaguar XK.
Compare all specifications:
| 2000 Ford Artic | 1952 Jaguar XK | |
| Make | Ford | Jaguar |
| Model | Artic | XK |
| Year Released | 2000 | 1952 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 3998 cc | 3441 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Horse Power | 128 HP | 158 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6250 RPM | 5000 RPM |
| Torque | 325 Nm | 290 Nm |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 2 seats |
| Vehicle Weight | 1298 kg | 1295 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 5240 mm | 4430 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1830 mm | 1570 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1790 mm | 1340 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 3200 mm | 2600 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 68 L | 63 L |
