2004 Ford Thunderbird vs. 2011 Jaguar XF
To start off, 2011 Jaguar XF is newer by 7 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2004 Ford Thunderbird. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2004 Ford Thunderbird would be higher. At 3,933 cc (8 cylinders), 2004 Ford Thunderbird is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2004 Ford Thunderbird (280 HP) has 43 more horse power than 2011 Jaguar XF. (237 HP). In normal driving conditions, 2004 Ford Thunderbird should accelerate faster than 2011 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. Let's talk about torque, 2011 Jaguar XF (500 Nm) has 112 more torque (in Nm) than 2004 Ford Thunderbird. (388 Nm). This means 2011 Jaguar XF will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2004 Ford Thunderbird.
Compare all specifications:
| 2004 Ford Thunderbird | 2011 Jaguar XF | |
| Make | Ford | Jaguar |
| Model | Thunderbird | XF |
| Year Released | 2004 | 2011 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 3933 cc | 3000 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 280 HP | 237 HP |
| Torque | 388 Nm | 500 Nm |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Number of Seats | 2 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 4740 mm | 4961 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1840 mm | 1877 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1330 mm | 1461 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2490 mm | 2908 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 12.4 L/100km | 6.3 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 68 L | 70 L |
