2006 Mazda RX-8 vs. 2009 Toyota Avalon
To start off, 2009 Toyota Avalon is newer by 3 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2006 Mazda RX-8. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2006 Mazda RX-8 would be higher. At 3,456 cc (6 cylinders), 2009 Toyota Avalon is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2009 Toyota Avalon (268 HP) has 56 more horse power than 2006 Mazda RX-8. (212 HP) In normal driving conditions, 2009 Toyota Avalon should accelerate faster than 2006 Mazda RX-8.
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, 2009 Toyota Avalon, 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, 2009 Toyota Avalon (336 Nm @ 4700 RPM) has 120 more torque (in Nm) than 2006 Mazda RX-8. (216 Nm @ 5500 RPM). This means 2009 Toyota Avalon 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 | 2009 Toyota Avalon | |
| Make | Mazda | Toyota |
| Model | RX-8 | Avalon |
| Year Released | 2006 | 2009 |
| Body Type | Coupe | Sedan |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1311 cc | 3456 cc |
| Engine Type | dual-disk rotary | V |
| Horse Power | 212 HP | 268 HP |
| Torque | 216 Nm | 336 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 5500 RPM | 4700 RPM |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | Automatic |
| Number of Seats | 4 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 4430 mm | 5020 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1780 mm | 1860 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1350 mm | 1490 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2710 mm | 2830 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Highway | 9.4 L/100km | 8.6 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 13.1 L/100km | 12.5 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 60 L | 70 L |
