2003 Mazda RX-8 vs. 2005 Mercedes-Benz CLK
To start off, 2005 Mercedes-Benz CLK is newer by 2 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2003 Mazda RX-8. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2003 Mazda RX-8 would be higher. At 3,196 cc (6 cylinders), 2005 Mercedes-Benz CLK is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2003 Mazda RX-8 (228 HP @ 8200 RPM) has 13 more horse power than 2005 Mercedes-Benz CLK. (215 HP @ 4200 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2003 Mazda RX-8 should accelerate faster than 2005 Mercedes-Benz CLK. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2005 Mercedes-Benz CLK weights approximately 291 kg more than 2003 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, 2005 Mercedes-Benz CLK (311 Nm) has 100 more torque (in Nm) than 2003 Mazda RX-8. (211 Nm). This means 2005 Mercedes-Benz CLK will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2003 Mazda RX-8.
Compare all specifications:
2003 Mazda RX-8 | 2005 Mercedes-Benz CLK | |
Make | Mazda | Mercedes-Benz |
Model | RX-8 | CLK |
Year Released | 2003 | 2005 |
Body Type | Coupe | Convertible |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1308 cc | 3196 cc |
Engine Type | dual-disk rotary | V |
Horse Power | 228 HP | 215 HP |
Engine RPM | 8200 RPM | 4200 RPM |
Torque | 211 Nm | 311 Nm |
Engine Compression Ratio | 10.0:1 | 10.0:1 |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Number of Seats | 4 seats | 4 seats |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 2 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 1425 kg | 1716 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4440 mm | 4640 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1780 mm | 1750 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1350 mm | 1390 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2710 mm | 2860 mm |
Fuel Consumption Overall | 11.4 L/100km | 10.7 L/100km |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 61 L | 62 L |