1983 Citroen CX vs. 2009 Mazda RX-8
To start off, 2009 Mazda RX-8 is newer by 26 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1983 Citroen CX. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1983 Citroen CX would be higher. At 1,995 cc (4 cylinders), 1983 Citroen CX is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2009 Mazda RX-8 (232 HP @ 8500 RPM) has 126 more horse power than 1983 Citroen CX. (106 HP @ 5500 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2009 Mazda RX-8 should accelerate faster than 1983 Citroen CX.
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, 1983 Citroen CX, 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 57 more torque (in Nm) than 1983 Citroen CX. (159 Nm @ 3250 RPM). This means 2009 Mazda RX-8 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1983 Citroen CX.
Compare all specifications:
| 1983 Citroen CX | 2009 Mazda RX-8 | |
| Make | Citroen | Mazda |
| Model | CX | RX-8 |
| Year Released | 1983 | 2009 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1995 cc | 1306 cc |
| Engine Type | in-line | dual-disk rotary |
| Horse Power | 106 HP | 232 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5500 RPM | 8500 RPM |
| Torque | 159 Nm | 216 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 3250 RPM | 5500 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Front | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 4 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 4670 mm | 4470 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1770 mm | 1780 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1370 mm | 1350 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2750 mm | 2710 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 5.2 L/100km | 13.1 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 80 L | 64 L |
