2002 Jaguar XJ vs. 1963 Mini MK I

To start off, 2002 Jaguar XJ is newer by 39 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1963 Mini MK I. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1963 Mini MK I would be higher. At 4,196 cc (8 cylinders), 2002 Jaguar XJ is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2002 Jaguar XJ (301 HP @ 4000 RPM) has 267 more horse power than 1963 Mini MK I. (34 HP @ 5500 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2002 Jaguar XJ should accelerate faster than 1963 Mini MK I. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2002 Jaguar XJ weights approximately 1185 kg more than 1963 Mini MK I. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.

Because 2002 Jaguar XJ 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 2002 Jaguar XJ. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1963 Mini MK I, 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, 2002 Jaguar XJ (541 Nm) has 481 more torque (in Nm) than 1963 Mini MK I. (60 Nm). This means 2002 Jaguar XJ will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1963 Mini MK I. 2002 Jaguar XJ has automatic transmission and 1963 Mini MK I has manual transmission. 1963 Mini MK I will offer better control over acceleration and deceleration in addition to better fuel efficiency overall. 2002 Jaguar XJ will be easier to drive especially in heavy traffic.

Compare all specifications: