1979 Lancia Delta vs. 2009 Mazda RX-8
To start off, 2009 Mazda RX-8 is newer by 30 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1979 Lancia Delta. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1979 Lancia Delta would be higher. At 1,584 cc (4 cylinders), 1979 Lancia Delta is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2009 Mazda RX-8 (232 HP @ 8500 RPM) has 144 more horse power than 1979 Lancia Delta. (88 HP @ 6250 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2009 Mazda RX-8 should accelerate faster than 1979 Lancia Delta.
Because 2009 Mazda RX-8 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 2009 Mazda RX-8. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1979 Lancia Delta, 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, 2009 Mazda RX-8 (216 Nm @ 5500 RPM) has 93 more torque (in Nm) than 1979 Lancia Delta. (123 Nm @ 4250 RPM). This means 2009 Mazda RX-8 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1979 Lancia Delta.
Compare all specifications:
| 1979 Lancia Delta | 2009 Mazda RX-8 | |
| Make | Lancia | Mazda |
| Model | Delta | RX-8 |
| Year Released | 1979 | 2009 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1584 cc | 1306 cc |
| Engine Type | in-line | dual-disk rotary |
| Horse Power | 88 HP | 232 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6250 RPM | 8500 RPM |
| Torque | 123 Nm | 216 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 4250 RPM | 5500 RPM |
| Drive Type | Front | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 4 seats |
| Number of Doors | 5 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 3900 mm | 4470 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1630 mm | 1780 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1390 mm | 1350 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2480 mm | 2710 mm |
| Fuel Consumption | 8.4 L/100km | 10.7 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 10.1 L/100km | 14.7 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 7 L/100km | 13.1 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 57 L | 64 L |
