2005 Mazda RX-8 vs. 2013 Cadillac CTS
To start off, 2013 Cadillac CTS is newer by 8 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2005 Mazda RX-8. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2005 Mazda RX-8 would be higher. At 3,000 cc (6 cylinders), 2013 Cadillac CTS is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2013 Cadillac CTS (266 HP @ 7000 RPM) has 69 more horse power than 2005 Mazda RX-8. (197 HP @ 4000 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2013 Cadillac CTS should accelerate faster than 2005 Mazda RX-8. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2013 Cadillac CTS weights approximately 436 kg more than 2005 Mazda RX-8. 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, 2013 Cadillac CTS (302 Nm @ 5700 RPM) has 80 more torque (in Nm) than 2005 Mazda RX-8. (222 Nm @ 5500 RPM). This means 2013 Cadillac CTS will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2005 Mazda RX-8.
Compare all specifications:
| 2005 Mazda RX-8 | 2013 Cadillac CTS | |
| Make | Mazda | Cadillac |
| Model | RX-8 | CTS |
| Year Released | 2005 | 2013 |
| Body Type | Coupe | Station Wagon |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1311 cc | 3000 cc |
| Engine Type | dual-disk rotary | V |
| Horse Power | 197 HP | 266 HP |
| Engine RPM | 4000 RPM | 7000 RPM |
| Torque | 222 Nm | 302 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 5500 RPM | 5700 RPM |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 10.0:1 | 11.7 |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | 6-speed automatic |
| Number of Seats | 4 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1385 kg | 1821 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4430 mm | 4877 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1780 mm | 1842 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1350 mm | 1473 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2680 mm | 2880 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Highway | 10 L/100km | 8.7 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 13.2 L/100km | 13 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 11.9 L/100km | 10.7 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 60 L | 68 L |
