2002 Opel Omega vs. 2010 Mazda RX-8
To start off, 2010 Mazda RX-8 is newer by 8 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2002 Opel Omega. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2002 Opel Omega would be higher. At 2,497 cc (6 cylinders), 2002 Opel Omega is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2010 Mazda RX-8 (232 HP @ 8500 RPM) has 89 more horse power than 2002 Opel Omega. (143 HP @ 4000 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2010 Mazda RX-8 should accelerate faster than 2002 Opel Omega. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2002 Opel Omega weights approximately 343 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, 2002 Opel Omega (300 Nm @ 1750 RPM) has 85 more torque (in Nm) than 2010 Mazda RX-8. (215 Nm @ 5500 RPM). This means 2002 Opel Omega will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2010 Mazda RX-8.
Compare all specifications:
| 2002 Opel Omega | 2010 Mazda RX-8 | |
| Make | Opel | Mazda |
| Model | Omega | RX-8 |
| Year Released | 2002 | 2010 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2497 cc | 1300 cc |
| Engine Type | in-line | dual-disk rotary |
| Horse Power | 143 HP | 232 HP |
| Engine RPM | 4000 RPM | 8500 RPM |
| Torque | 300 Nm | 215 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 1750 RPM | 5500 RPM |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 4 seats |
| Number of Doors | 5 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1733 kg | 1390 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4900 mm | 4460 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1780 mm | 1770 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1550 mm | 1341 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2740 mm | 2700 mm |
| Fuel Consumption | 6.3 L/100km | 10.7 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 10.4 L/100km | 14.7 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 75 L | 64 L |
