2007 Mazda RX-8 vs. 2004 Nissan Murano
To start off, 2007 Mazda RX-8 is newer by 3 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2004 Nissan Murano. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2004 Nissan Murano would be higher. At 3,507 cc (6 cylinders), 2004 Nissan Murano is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2004 Nissan Murano (245 HP @ 3600 RPM) has 13 more horse power than 2007 Mazda RX-8. (232 HP @ 8500 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2004 Nissan Murano should accelerate faster than 2007 Mazda RX-8.
Because 2007 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 2007 Mazda RX-8. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2004 Nissan Murano, 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, 2004 Nissan Murano (334 Nm) has 118 more torque (in Nm) than 2007 Mazda RX-8. (216 Nm). This means 2004 Nissan Murano will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2007 Mazda RX-8.
Compare all specifications:
| 2007 Mazda RX-8 | 2004 Nissan Murano | |
| Make | Mazda | Nissan |
| Model | RX-8 | Murano |
| Year Released | 2007 | 2004 |
| Body Type | Coupe | Crossover |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1308 cc | 3507 cc |
| Engine Type | dual-disk rotary | V |
| Horse Power | 232 HP | 245 HP |
| Engine RPM | 8500 RPM | 3600 RPM |
| Torque | 216 Nm | 334 Nm |
| Engine Bore Size | 73 mm | 96 mm |
| Engine Stroke Size | 85 mm | 81 mm |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Number of Seats | 4 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 5 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 4430 mm | 4770 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1780 mm | 1890 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1350 mm | 1700 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2710 mm | 2830 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Highway | 10 L/100km | 9.4 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 13.2 L/100km | 11.8 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 11.9 L/100km | 10.7 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 60 L | 82 L |
