2009 Kia Cee'd vs. 2007 Mazda RX-8
To start off, 2009 Kia Cee'd is newer by 2 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2007 Mazda RX-8. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2007 Mazda RX-8 would be higher. At 1,975 cc (4 cylinders), 2009 Kia Cee'd is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2007 Mazda RX-8 (232 HP @ 8500 RPM) has 91 more horse power than 2009 Kia Cee'd. (141 HP @ 6000 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2007 Mazda RX-8 should accelerate faster than 2009 Kia Cee'd.
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, 2009 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, 2007 Mazda RX-8 (216 Nm @ 5500 RPM) has 29 more torque (in Nm) than 2009 Kia Cee'd. (187 Nm @ 4600 RPM). This means 2007 Mazda RX-8 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2009 Kia Cee'd.
Compare all specifications:
2009 Kia Cee'd | 2007 Mazda RX-8 | |
Make | Kia | Mazda |
Model | Cee'd | RX-8 |
Year Released | 2009 | 2007 |
Body Type | Hatchback | Coupe |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1975 cc | 1308 cc |
Engine Type | in-line | dual-disk rotary |
Horse Power | 141 HP | 232 HP |
Engine RPM | 6000 RPM | 8500 RPM |
Torque | 187 Nm | 216 Nm |
Torque RPM | 4600 RPM | 5500 RPM |
Engine Bore Size | 82 mm | 73 mm |
Engine Stroke Size | 93.5 mm | 85 mm |
Drive Type | Front | Rear |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 4 seats |
Number of Doors | 5 doors | 4 doors |
Vehicle Length | 4240 mm | 4430 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1800 mm | 1780 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1490 mm | 1350 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2660 mm | 2710 mm |
Fuel Consumption Overall | 7.1 L/100km | 11.9 L/100km |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 53 L | 60 L |