2006 Mazda RX-8 vs. 2003 Opel Signum
To start off, 2006 Mazda RX-8 is newer by 3 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2003 Opel Signum. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2003 Opel Signum would be higher. At 2,171 cc (4 cylinders), 2003 Opel Signum is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2006 Mazda RX-8 (212 HP @ 7500 RPM) has 60 more horse power than 2003 Opel Signum. (152 HP @ 5600 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2006 Mazda RX-8 should accelerate faster than 2003 Opel Signum.
Because 2006 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 2006 Mazda RX-8. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2003 Opel Signum, 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 Opel Signum (220 Nm @ 3800 RPM) has 4 more torque (in Nm) than 2006 Mazda RX-8. (216 Nm @ 5500 RPM). This means 2003 Opel Signum will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2006 Mazda RX-8.
Compare all specifications:
| 2006 Mazda RX-8 | 2003 Opel Signum | |
| Make | Mazda | Opel |
| Model | RX-8 | Signum |
| Year Released | 2006 | 2003 |
| Body Type | Coupe | Hatchback |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1311 cc | 2171 cc |
| Engine Type | dual-disk rotary | in-line |
| Horse Power | 212 HP | 152 HP |
| Engine RPM | 7500 RPM | 5600 RPM |
| Torque | 216 Nm | 220 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 5500 RPM | 3800 RPM |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | Automatic |
| Number of Seats | 4 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 5 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 4430 mm | 4640 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1780 mm | 1800 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1350 mm | 1470 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2710 mm | 2840 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Highway | 9.4 L/100km | 7.2 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 13.1 L/100km | 12.4 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 60 L | 60 L |
