2009 Mazda RX-8 vs. 2005 Mitsubishi Lancer
To start off, 2009 Mazda RX-8 is newer by 4 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2005 Mitsubishi Lancer. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2005 Mitsubishi Lancer would be higher. At 1,999 cc (4 cylinders), 2005 Mitsubishi Lancer is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2005 Mitsubishi Lancer (276 HP @ 4000 RPM) has 44 more horse power than 2009 Mazda RX-8. (232 HP @ 8500 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2005 Mitsubishi Lancer should accelerate faster than 2009 Mazda RX-8.
Because 2005 Mitsubishi Lancer is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2009 Mazda RX-8. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2005 Mitsubishi Lancer will offer significantly more control. 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, 2005 Mitsubishi Lancer (373 Nm) has 157 more torque (in Nm) than 2009 Mazda RX-8. (216 Nm). This means 2005 Mitsubishi Lancer will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2009 Mazda RX-8.
Compare all specifications:
| 2009 Mazda RX-8 | 2005 Mitsubishi Lancer | |
| Make | Mazda | Mitsubishi |
| Model | RX-8 | Lancer |
| Year Released | 2009 | 2005 |
| Body Type | Coupe | Sedan |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1306 cc | 1999 cc |
| Engine Type | dual-disk rotary | in-line |
| Horse Power | 232 HP | 276 HP |
| Engine RPM | 8500 RPM | 4000 RPM |
| Torque | 216 Nm | 373 Nm |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | 4WD |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| Number of Seats | 4 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 4470 mm | 4540 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1780 mm | 1780 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1350 mm | 1460 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2710 mm | 2570 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Highway | 10.7 L/100km | 9.1 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 14.7 L/100km | 12.4 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 13.1 L/100km | 11.2 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 64 L | 53 L |
