1966 Jaguar MK X vs. 2007 Mazda CX-9
To start off, 2007 Mazda CX-9 is newer by 41 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1966 Jaguar MK X. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1966 Jaguar MK X would be higher. At 3,781 cc (6 cylinders), 1966 Jaguar MK X is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2007 Mazda CX-9 (263 HP @ 6250 RPM) has 11 more horse power than 1966 Jaguar MK X. (252 HP @ 5200 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2007 Mazda CX-9 should accelerate faster than 1966 Jaguar MK X.
Because 1966 Jaguar MK X 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 1966 Jaguar MK X. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2007 Mazda CX-9, 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, 1966 Jaguar MK X (360 Nm @ 4000 RPM) has 21 more torque (in Nm) than 2007 Mazda CX-9. (339 Nm @ 4500 RPM). This means 1966 Jaguar MK X will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2007 Mazda CX-9.
Compare all specifications:
1966 Jaguar MK X | 2007 Mazda CX-9 | |
Make | Jaguar | Mazda |
Model | MK X | CX-9 |
Year Released | 1966 | 2007 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 3781 cc | 3496 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | V |
Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 252 HP | 263 HP |
Engine RPM | 5200 RPM | 6250 RPM |
Torque | 360 Nm | 339 Nm |
Torque RPM | 4000 RPM | 4500 RPM |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 7 seats |
Number of Doors | 2 doors | 5 doors |
Vehicle Length | 5130 mm | 5080 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1930 mm | 1940 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1390 mm | 1740 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2900 mm | 2880 mm |
Fuel Consumption Overall | 11.6 L/100km | 11.8 L/100km |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 63 L | 76 L |