2008 Mazda RX-8 vs. 2009 Chrysler Voyager
To start off, 2009 Chrysler Voyager is newer by 1 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2008 Mazda RX-8. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2008 Mazda RX-8 would be higher. At 2,429 cc (4 cylinders), 2009 Chrysler Voyager is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2009 Chrysler Voyager (145 HP @ 5200 RPM) has 37 more horse power than 2008 Mazda RX-8. (108 HP @ 8200 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2009 Chrysler Voyager should accelerate faster than 2008 Mazda RX-8.
Because 2008 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 2008 Mazda RX-8. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2009 Chrysler Voyager, 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 Chrysler Voyager (218 Nm @ 4000 RPM) has 78 more torque (in Nm) than 2008 Mazda RX-8. (140 Nm @ 5500 RPM). This means 2009 Chrysler Voyager will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2008 Mazda RX-8.
Compare all specifications:
| 2008 Mazda RX-8 | 2009 Chrysler Voyager | |
| Make | Mazda | Chrysler |
| Model | RX-8 | Voyager |
| Year Released | 2008 | 2009 |
| Body Type | Coupe | Minivan |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1308 cc | 2429 cc |
| Engine Type | dual-disk rotary | in-line |
| Horse Power | 108 HP | 145 HP |
| Engine RPM | 8200 RPM | 5200 RPM |
| Torque | 140 Nm | 218 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 5500 RPM | 4000 RPM |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 10.0:1 | 10.0:1 |
| Top Speed | 170 km/hour | 183 km/hour |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | Automatic |
| Number of Seats | 4 seats | 7 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 5 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 4440 mm | 4810 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1780 mm | 2000 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1350 mm | 1760 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2710 mm | 2880 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 110 L/100km | 10.1 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 61 L | 75 L |
