2004 Mazda RX-8 vs. 2002 MCC Crossblade

To start off, 2004 Mazda RX-8 is newer by 2 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2002 MCC Crossblade. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2002 MCC Crossblade would be higher. At 2,616 cc, 2004 Mazda RX-8 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2004 Mazda RX-8 (189 HP) has 119 more horse power than 2002 MCC Crossblade. (70 HP). In normal driving conditions, 2004 Mazda RX-8 should accelerate faster than 2002 MCC Crossblade. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2004 Mazda RX-8 weights approximately 652 kg more than 2002 MCC Crossblade. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.

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 Mazda RX-8 (220 Nm @ 5000 RPM) has 118 more torque (in Nm) than 2002 MCC Crossblade. (102 Nm @ 3210 RPM). This means 2004 Mazda RX-8 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2002 MCC Crossblade.

Compare all specifications: