2008 BMW 328 vs. 2009 Mazda RX-8
To start off, 2009 Mazda RX-8 is newer by 1 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2008 BMW 328. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2008 BMW 328 would be higher. At 3,001 cc (6 cylinders), 2008 BMW 328 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2009 Mazda RX-8 (232 HP @ 8500 RPM) has 2 more horse power than 2008 BMW 328. (230 HP @ 6500 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2009 Mazda RX-8 should accelerate faster than 2008 BMW 328.
Because 2009 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 2009 Mazda RX-8. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2008 BMW 328, 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, 2008 BMW 328 (271 Nm @ 2750 RPM) has 55 more torque (in Nm) than 2009 Mazda RX-8. (216 Nm @ 5500 RPM). This means 2008 BMW 328 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2009 Mazda RX-8.
Compare all specifications:
| 2008 BMW 328 | 2009 Mazda RX-8 | |
| Make | BMW | Mazda |
| Model | 328 | RX-8 |
| Year Released | 2008 | 2009 |
| Body Type | Sedan | Coupe |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 3001 cc | 1307 cc |
| Engine Type | in-line | dual-disk rotary |
| Horse Power | 230 HP | 232 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6500 RPM | 8500 RPM |
| Torque | 271 Nm | 216 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 2750 RPM | 5500 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Front | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 4 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 4530 mm | 4470 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1820 mm | 1780 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1430 mm | 1350 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2770 mm | 2710 mm |
| Fuel Consumption | 9.4 L/100km | 10.7 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 13.8 L/100km | 14.7 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 11.8 L/100km | 13.1 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 61 L | 64 L |
