2003 Ford Econoline vs. 1994 Jaguar XJ6
To start off, 2003 Ford Econoline is newer by 9 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1994 Jaguar XJ6. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1994 Jaguar XJ6 would be higher. At 4,195 cc (6 cylinders), 2003 Ford Econoline is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1994 Jaguar XJ6 (216 HP @ 5100 RPM) has 19 more horse power than 2003 Ford Econoline. (197 HP @ 4700 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 1994 Jaguar XJ6 should accelerate faster than 2003 Ford Econoline.
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, 2003 Ford Econoline (338 Nm @ 2700 RPM) has 36 more torque (in Nm) than 1994 Jaguar XJ6. (302 Nm @ 4500 RPM). This means 2003 Ford Econoline will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1994 Jaguar XJ6.
Compare all specifications:
| 2003 Ford Econoline | 1994 Jaguar XJ6 | |
| Make | Ford | Jaguar |
| Model | Econoline | XJ6 |
| Year Released | 2003 | 1994 |
| Body Type | Van | Sedan |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 4195 cc | 3238 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 197 HP | 216 HP |
| Engine RPM | 4700 RPM | 5100 RPM |
| Torque | 338 Nm | 302 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 2700 RPM | 4500 RPM |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Vehicle Length | 5390 mm | 5030 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 2020 mm | 2080 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 2060 mm | 1310 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 3510 mm | 2880 mm |
