2003 Audi A8 vs. 2009 Mazda CX-9
To start off, 2009 Mazda CX-9 is newer by 6 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2003 Audi A8. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2003 Audi A8 would be higher. At 3,936 cc (8 cylinders), 2003 Audi A8 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2009 Mazda CX-9 (273 HP @ 6250 RPM) has 1 more horse power than 2003 Audi A8. (272 HP @ 3750 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2009 Mazda CX-9 should accelerate faster than 2003 Audi A8. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2003 Audi A8 weights approximately 491 kg more than 2009 Mazda CX-9.
Because 2003 Audi A8 is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2009 Mazda CX-9. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2003 Audi A8 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, 2003 Audi A8 (650 Nm @ 1800 RPM) has 284 more torque (in Nm) than 2009 Mazda CX-9. (366 Nm @ 4500 RPM). This means 2003 Audi A8 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2009 Mazda CX-9.
Compare all specifications:
2003 Audi A8 | 2009 Mazda CX-9 | |
Make | Audi | Mazda |
Model | A8 | CX-9 |
Year Released | 2003 | 2009 |
Body Type | Sedan | SUV |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 3936 cc | 3726 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | V |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 272 HP | 273 HP |
Engine RPM | 3750 RPM | 6250 RPM |
Torque | 650 Nm | 366 Nm |
Torque RPM | 1800 RPM | 4500 RPM |
Engine Compression Ratio | 17.5:1 | 9.7:1 |
Fuel Type | Diesel | Gasoline |
Drive Type | 4WD | Front |
Transmission Type | Automatic | Automatic |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 7 seats |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 5 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 1820 kg | 1329 kg |
Vehicle Length | 5190 mm | 5080 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1900 mm | 1940 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1460 mm | 1730 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 3080 mm | 2880 mm |
Fuel Consumption | 7.5 L/100km | 10.8 L/100km |
Fuel Consumption City | 13.4 L/100km | 14.9 L/100km |
Fuel Consumption Overall | 9.6 L/100km | 13.2 L/100km |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 90 L | 76 L |