1994 Ford Aerostar vs. 2010 Mazda RX-8
To start off, 2010 Mazda RX-8 is newer by 16 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1994 Ford Aerostar. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1994 Ford Aerostar would be higher. At 2,978 cc (6 cylinders), 1994 Ford Aerostar is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2010 Mazda RX-8 (212 HP @ 7500 RPM) has 79 more horse power than 1994 Ford Aerostar. (133 HP @ 4600 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2010 Mazda RX-8 should accelerate faster than 1994 Ford Aerostar. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1994 Ford Aerostar weights approximately 104 kg more than 2010 Mazda RX-8.
Both vehicles are rear wheel drive (RWD) - it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, both vehicles do the job better than front wheel drive vehicles. 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, 1994 Ford Aerostar (217 Nm @ 2800 RPM) has 2 more torque (in Nm) than 2010 Mazda RX-8. (215 Nm @ 5500 RPM). This means 1994 Ford Aerostar will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2010 Mazda RX-8.
Compare all specifications:
| 1994 Ford Aerostar | 2010 Mazda RX-8 | |
| Make | Ford | Mazda |
| Model | Aerostar | RX-8 |
| Year Released | 1994 | 2010 |
| Body Type | Minivan | Coupe |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2978 cc | 1300 cc |
| Engine Type | V | dual-disk rotary |
| Horse Power | 133 HP | 212 HP |
| Engine RPM | 4600 RPM | 7500 RPM |
| Torque | 217 Nm | 215 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 2800 RPM | 5500 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Vehicle Weight | 1515 kg | 1411 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4450 mm | 4460 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1830 mm | 1770 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1860 mm | 1341 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 3030 mm | 2700 mm |
