2003 Jaguar XF vs. 2005 MG ZT
To start off, 2005 MG ZT is newer by 2 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2003 Jaguar XF. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2003 Jaguar XF would be higher. At 7,000 cc (10 cylinders), 2003 Jaguar XF is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2005 MG ZT weights approximately 405 kg more than 2003 Jaguar XF.
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.
Compare all specifications:
| 2003 Jaguar XF | 2005 MG ZT | |
| Make | Jaguar | MG |
| Model | XF | ZT |
| Year Released | 2003 | 2005 |
| Body Type | Sedan | Sedan |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 7000 cc | 4599 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 10 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 2 valves |
| Horse Power | 0 HP | 256 HP |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline - Premium |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1350 kg | 1755 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4560 mm | 4800 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1990 mm | 1780 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1240 mm | 1420 mm |
