2012 Jaguar XF vs. 1981 Oldsmobile Omega
To start off, 2012 Jaguar XF is newer by 31 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1981 Oldsmobile Omega. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1981 Oldsmobile Omega would be higher. At 2,474 cc (4 cylinders), 1981 Oldsmobile Omega is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2012 Jaguar XF (187 HP) has 97 more horse power than 1981 Oldsmobile Omega. (90 HP). In normal driving conditions, 2012 Jaguar XF should accelerate faster than 1981 Oldsmobile Omega.
Because 2012 Jaguar XF 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 2012 Jaguar XF. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1981 Oldsmobile Omega, 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, 2012 Jaguar XF (450 Nm) has 267 more torque (in Nm) than 1981 Oldsmobile Omega. (183 Nm). This means 2012 Jaguar XF will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1981 Oldsmobile Omega.
Compare all specifications:
| 2012 Jaguar XF | 1981 Oldsmobile Omega | |
| Make | Jaguar | Oldsmobile |
| Model | XF | Omega |
| Year Released | 2012 | 1981 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2200 cc | 2474 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 187 HP | 90 HP |
| Torque | 450 Nm | 183 Nm |
| Fuel Type | Diesel | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Transmission Type | 6-speed shiftable automatic | Automatic |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Vehicle Length | 4961 mm | 4610 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1877 mm | 1720 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1461 mm | 1330 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2908 mm | 2670 mm |
