2006 Mazda RX-8 vs. 2010 Kia Cee'd
To start off, 2010 Kia Cee'd is newer by 4 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 1,590 cc (4 cylinders), 2010 Kia Cee'd is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2010 Kia Cee'd (124 HP @ 6200 RPM) has 16 more horse power than 2006 Mazda RX-8. (108 HP @ 8200 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2010 Kia Cee'd 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, 2010 Kia Cee'd, 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, 2010 Kia Cee'd (154 Nm @ 5200 RPM) has 14 more torque (in Nm) than 2006 Mazda RX-8. (140 Nm @ 5500 RPM). This means 2010 Kia Cee'd 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 | 2010 Kia Cee'd | |
Make | Mazda | Kia |
Model | RX-8 | Cee'd |
Year Released | 2006 | 2010 |
Body Type | Coupe | Hatchback |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1308 cc | 1590 cc |
Engine Type | dual-disk rotary | in-line |
Horse Power | 108 HP | 124 HP |
Engine RPM | 8200 RPM | 6200 RPM |
Torque | 140 Nm | 154 Nm |
Torque RPM | 5500 RPM | 5200 RPM |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Number of Seats | 4 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 3 doors |
Vehicle Length | 4430 mm | 4260 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1780 mm | 1800 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1350 mm | 1460 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2710 mm | 2660 mm |