2004 Caterham 7 vs. 2002 Mazda RX-8
To start off, 2004 Caterham 7 is newer by 2 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2002 Mazda RX-8. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2002 Mazda RX-8 would be higher. At 2,615 cc, 2002 Mazda RX-8 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2004 Caterham 7 (200 HP @ 7000 RPM) has 11 more horse power than 2002 Mazda RX-8. (189 HP @ 7000 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2004 Caterham 7 should accelerate faster than 2002 Mazda RX-8. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2002 Mazda RX-8 weights approximately 850 kg more than 2004 Caterham 7.
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, 2004 Caterham 7 (224 Nm @ 5750 RPM) has 4 more torque (in Nm) than 2002 Mazda RX-8. (220 Nm @ 5000 RPM). This means 2004 Caterham 7 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2002 Mazda RX-8.
Compare all specifications:
2004 Caterham 7 | 2002 Mazda RX-8 | |
Make | Caterham | Mazda |
Model | 7 | RX-8 |
Year Released | 2004 | 2002 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 2261 cc | 2615 cc |
Engine Type | in-line | dual-disk rotary |
Horse Power | 200 HP | 189 HP |
Engine RPM | 7000 RPM | 7000 RPM |
Torque | 224 Nm | 220 Nm |
Torque RPM | 5750 RPM | 5000 RPM |
Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
Number of Seats | 2 seats | 4 seats |
Vehicle Weight | 540 kg | 1390 kg |
Vehicle Length | 3310 mm | 4440 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1690 mm | 1780 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1150 mm | 1350 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2230 mm | 2710 mm |