2002 Jaguar XJR vs. 2012 Ford Fusion
To start off, 2012 Ford Fusion is newer by 10 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2002 Jaguar XJR. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2002 Jaguar XJR would be higher. At 4,196 cc (8 cylinders), 2002 Jaguar XJR is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2012 Ford Fusion weights approximately 22 kg more than 2002 Jaguar XJR.
Because 2002 Jaguar XJR 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 XJR. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2012 Ford Fusion, 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.
Compare all specifications:
| 2002 Jaguar XJR | 2012 Ford Fusion | |
| Make | Jaguar | Ford |
| Model | XJR | Fusion |
| Year Released | 2002 | 2012 |
| Body Type | Sedan | Sedan |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 4196 cc | 2500 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 390 HP | 0 HP |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | 6-speed shiftable automatic |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1665 kg | 1687 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 5100 mm | 4841 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1870 mm | 1834 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1450 mm | 1445 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2910 mm | 2728 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Highway | 9 L/100km | 6.5 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 18.6 L/100km | 5.7 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 85 L | 66 L |
