1993 Audi S2 vs. 2009 Mazda RX-8
To start off, 2009 Mazda RX-8 is newer by 16 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1993 Audi S2. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1993 Audi S2 would be higher. At 2,226 cc (5 cylinders), 1993 Audi S2 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2009 Mazda RX-8 (232 HP @ 8500 RPM) has 5 more horse power than 1993 Audi S2. (227 HP @ 5900 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2009 Mazda RX-8 should accelerate faster than 1993 Audi S2. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1993 Audi S2 weights approximately 348 kg more than 2009 Mazda RX-8.
Because 1993 Audi S2 is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2009 Mazda RX-8. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1993 Audi S2 will offer significantly more control. 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, 1993 Audi S2 (350 Nm @ 1950 RPM) has 134 more torque (in Nm) than 2009 Mazda RX-8. (216 Nm @ 5500 RPM). This means 1993 Audi S2 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2009 Mazda RX-8.
Compare all specifications:
| 1993 Audi S2 | 2009 Mazda RX-8 | |
| Make | Audi | Mazda |
| Model | S2 | RX-8 |
| Year Released | 1993 | 2009 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2226 cc | 1307 cc |
| Engine Type | in-line | dual-disk rotary |
| Horse Power | 227 HP | 232 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5900 RPM | 8500 RPM |
| Torque | 350 Nm | 216 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 1950 RPM | 5500 RPM |
| Drive Type | 4WD | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| Number of Seats | 4 seats | 4 seats |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1473 kg | 1125 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4410 mm | 4470 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1720 mm | 1780 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1380 mm | 1350 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2560 mm | 2710 mm |
| Fuel Consumption | 9.1 L/100km | 10.7 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 14 L/100km | 14.7 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 8.2 L/100km | 13.1 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 70 L | 64 L |
