2004 Dodge Neon vs. 2003 BMW Z8
To start off, 2004 Dodge Neon is newer by 1 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2003 BMW Z8. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2003 BMW Z8 would be higher. At 4,939 cc (8 cylinders), 2003 BMW Z8 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2003 BMW Z8 (400 HP @ 6600 RPM) has 268 more horse power than 2004 Dodge Neon. (132 HP @ 5600 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2003 BMW Z8 should accelerate faster than 2004 Dodge Neon. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2003 BMW Z8 weights approximately 414 kg more than 2004 Dodge Neon. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Because 2003 BMW Z8 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 BMW Z8. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2004 Dodge Neon, 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, 2003 BMW Z8 (500 Nm) has 324 more torque (in Nm) than 2004 Dodge Neon. (176 Nm). This means 2003 BMW Z8 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2004 Dodge Neon.
Compare all specifications:
| 2004 Dodge Neon | 2003 BMW Z8 | |
| Make | Dodge | BMW |
| Model | Neon | Z8 |
| Year Released | 2004 | 2003 |
| Body Type | Sedan | Convertible |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1999 cc | 4939 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 132 HP | 400 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5600 RPM | 6600 RPM |
| Torque | 176 Nm | 500 Nm |
| Engine Bore Size | 87 mm | 94 mm |
| Engine Stroke Size | 83 mm | 89 mm |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 9.3:1 | 11.0:1 |
| Drive Type | Front | Rear |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 2 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 2 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1171 kg | 1585 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4440 mm | 4410 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1720 mm | 1840 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1430 mm | 1320 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2670 mm | 2580 mm |
| Fuel Consumption | 6.5 L/100km | 10.6 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 8.1 L/100km | 21.1 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 7.4 L/100km | 14.5 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 47 L | 73 L |
