2004 Ford C-MAX vs. 1990 Jaguar XJ6
To start off, 2004 Ford C-MAX is newer by 14 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1990 Jaguar XJ6. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1990 Jaguar XJ6 would be higher. At 3,239 cc (6 cylinders), 1990 Jaguar XJ6 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1990 Jaguar XJ6 (200 HP @ 5250 RPM) has 47 more horse power than 2004 Ford C-MAX. (153 HP @ 6000 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 1990 Jaguar XJ6 should accelerate faster than 2004 Ford C-MAX.
Because 1990 Jaguar XJ6 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 1990 Jaguar XJ6. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2004 Ford C-MAX, 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, 1990 Jaguar XJ6 (299 Nm) has 102 more torque (in Nm) than 2004 Ford C-MAX. (197 Nm). This means 1990 Jaguar XJ6 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2004 Ford C-MAX.
Compare all specifications:
2004 Ford C-MAX | 1990 Jaguar XJ6 | |
Make | Ford | Jaguar |
Model | C-MAX | XJ6 |
Year Released | 2004 | 1990 |
Body Type | Minivan | Sedan |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1998 cc | 3239 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 153 HP | 200 HP |
Engine RPM | 6000 RPM | 5250 RPM |
Torque | 197 Nm | 299 Nm |
Engine Bore Size | 87.5 mm | 91 mm |
Engine Stroke Size | 83.1 mm | 83 mm |
Drive Type | Front | Rear |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 5 doors | 4 doors |
Vehicle Length | 4340 mm | 4940 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1830 mm | 2010 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1600 mm | 1370 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2650 mm | 2880 mm |