2003 Mazda RX-8 vs. 2006 Mazda 3
To start off, 2006 Mazda 3 is newer by 3 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 1,598 cc, 2006 Mazda 3 is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2003 Mazda RX-8 weights approximately 185 kg more than 2006 Mazda 3.
Because 2003 Mazda RX-8 is rear wheel drive (RWD), it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, it will be much easier to do with 2003 Mazda RX-8. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2006 Mazda 3, being front wheel drive (FWD), will offer much better control with better grip. 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.
Compare all specifications:
| 2003 Mazda RX-8 | 2006 Mazda 3 | |
| Make | Mazda | Mazda |
| Model | RX-8 | 3 |
| Year Released | 2003 | 2006 |
| Body Type | Coupe | Sedan |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1308 cc | 1598 cc |
| Horse Power | 228 HP | 0 HP |
| Acceleration 0-100mph | 6.7 seconds | 11.3 seconds |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| Number of Seats | 4 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1425 kg | 1240 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4440 mm | 4500 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1780 mm | 1760 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1350 mm | 1470 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2710 mm | 2650 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 11.4 L/100km | 8.9 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 61 L | 55 L |
