2012 Aston Martin Cygnet vs. 2010 Jaguar XJ
To start off, 2012 Aston Martin Cygnet is newer by 2 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2010 Jaguar XJ. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2010 Jaguar XJ would be higher. At 3,000 cc (6 cylinders), 2010 Jaguar XJ is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2010 Jaguar XJ (271 HP) has 172 more horse power than 2012 Aston Martin Cygnet. (99 HP) In normal driving conditions, 2010 Jaguar XJ should accelerate faster than 2012 Aston Martin Cygnet.
Because 2010 Jaguar XJ 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 2010 Jaguar XJ. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2012 Aston Martin Cygnet, 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.
Compare all specifications:
| 2012 Aston Martin Cygnet | 2010 Jaguar XJ | |
| Make | Aston Martin | Jaguar |
| Model | Cygnet | XJ |
| Year Released | 2012 | 2010 |
| Body Type | Hatchback | Sedan |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1300 cc | 3000 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Horse Power | 99 HP | 271 HP |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Diesel |
| Drive Type | Front | Rear |
| Transmission Type | CVT | 6-speed shiftable automatic |
| Number of Seats | 4 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 3 doors | 4 doors |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 4 L/100km | 7.2 L/100km |
