2003 Mazda RX-8 vs. 2006 Rover 75
To start off, 2006 Rover 75 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 1,796 cc (4 cylinders), 2006 Rover 75 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2003 Mazda RX-8 (228 HP) has 70 more horse power than 2006 Rover 75. (158 HP). In normal driving conditions, 2003 Mazda RX-8 should accelerate faster than 2006 Rover 75. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2006 Rover 75 weights approximately 27 kg more than 2003 Mazda RX-8.
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 Rover 75, 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. Let's talk about torque, 2006 Rover 75 (215 Nm @ 2100 RPM) has 4 more torque (in Nm) than 2003 Mazda RX-8. (211 Nm @ 5500 RPM). This means 2006 Rover 75 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 | 2006 Rover 75 | |
| Make | Mazda | Rover |
| Model | RX-8 | 75 |
| Year Released | 2003 | 2006 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1308 cc | 1796 cc |
| Engine Type | dual-disk rotary | in-line |
| Horse Power | 228 HP | 158 HP |
| Torque | 211 Nm | 215 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 5500 RPM | 2100 RPM |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 10.0:1 | 10.5:1 |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline - Premium | Gasoline - Premium |
| Top Speed | 235 km/hour | 210 km/hour |
| Acceleration 0-100mph | 6.7 seconds | 9.6 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 | 1452 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4440 mm | 4750 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1780 mm | 1780 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1350 mm | 1430 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2710 mm | 2750 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 11.4 L/100km | 8 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 61 L | 65 L |
