2009 BMW 320 vs. 1968 Jaguar 240
To start off, 2009 BMW 320 is newer by 41 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1968 Jaguar 240. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1968 Jaguar 240 would be higher. At 2,483 cc (6 cylinders), 1968 Jaguar 240 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2009 BMW 320 (141 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 10 more horse power than 1968 Jaguar 240. (131 HP @ 5550 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2009 BMW 320 should accelerate faster than 1968 Jaguar 240.
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, 1968 Jaguar 240 (204 Nm @ 3700 RPM) has 14 more torque (in Nm) than 2009 BMW 320. (190 Nm @ 4250 RPM). This means 1968 Jaguar 240 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2009 BMW 320.
Compare all specifications:
2009 BMW 320 | 1968 Jaguar 240 | |
Make | BMW | Jaguar |
Model | 320 | 240 |
Year Released | 2009 | 1968 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1995 cc | 2483 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 2 valves |
Horse Power | 141 HP | 131 HP |
Engine RPM | 6000 RPM | 5550 RPM |
Torque | 190 Nm | 204 Nm |
Torque RPM | 4250 RPM | 3700 RPM |
Fuel Type | Diesel | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 4 doors |
Vehicle Length | 4540 mm | 4600 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1820 mm | 1700 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1430 mm | 1470 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2770 mm | 2740 mm |
Fuel Consumption Overall | 6 L/100km | 12.1 L/100km |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 63 L | 54 L |