2007 Honda CR-V vs. 2006 Mazda RX-8
To start off, 2007 Honda CR-V is newer by 1 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 2,352 cc (4 cylinders), 2007 Honda CR-V is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2006 Mazda RX-8 (212 HP @ 7500 RPM) has 46 more horse power than 2007 Honda CR-V. (166 HP @ 5800 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2006 Mazda RX-8 should accelerate faster than 2007 Honda CR-V.
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, 2007 Honda CR-V, 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, 2007 Honda CR-V (218 Nm @ 4200 RPM) has 2 more torque (in Nm) than 2006 Mazda RX-8. (216 Nm @ 5500 RPM). This means 2007 Honda CR-V will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2006 Mazda RX-8.
Compare all specifications:
| 2007 Honda CR-V | 2006 Mazda RX-8 | |
| Make | Honda | Mazda |
| Model | CR-V | RX-8 |
| Year Released | 2007 | 2006 |
| Body Type | SUV | Coupe |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2352 cc | 1311 cc |
| Engine Type | in-line | dual-disk rotary |
| Horse Power | 166 HP | 212 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5800 RPM | 7500 RPM |
| Torque | 218 Nm | 216 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 4200 RPM | 5500 RPM |
| Drive Type | Front | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | Automatic |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 4 seats |
| Number of Doors | 5 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 4530 mm | 4430 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1830 mm | 1780 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1690 mm | 1350 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2630 mm | 2710 mm |
| Fuel Consumption | 7.8 L/100km | 9.4 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 10.2 L/100km | 13.1 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 58 L | 60 L |
