2009 Mazda RX-8 vs. 2006 Toyota Highlander
To start off, 2009 Mazda RX-8 is newer by 3 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2006 Toyota Highlander. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2006 Toyota Highlander would be higher. At 3,310 cc (6 cylinders), 2006 Toyota Highlander is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2009 Mazda RX-8 (232 HP @ 8500 RPM) has 17 more horse power than 2006 Toyota Highlander. (215 HP @ 5600 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2009 Mazda RX-8 should accelerate faster than 2006 Toyota Highlander.
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, 2006 Toyota Highlander, 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, 2006 Toyota Highlander (301 Nm @ 3600 RPM) has 85 more torque (in Nm) than 2009 Mazda RX-8. (216 Nm @ 5500 RPM). This means 2006 Toyota Highlander 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 | 2006 Toyota Highlander | |
| Make | Mazda | Toyota |
| Model | RX-8 | Highlander |
| Year Released | 2009 | 2006 |
| Body Type | Coupe | SUV |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1308 cc | 3310 cc |
| Engine Type | dual-disk rotary | V |
| Horse Power | 232 HP | 215 HP |
| Engine RPM | 8500 RPM | 5600 RPM |
| Torque | 216 Nm | 301 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 5500 RPM | 3600 RPM |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Number of Seats | 4 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 5 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 4470 mm | 4700 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1780 mm | 1830 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1350 mm | 1730 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2710 mm | 2720 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Highway | 10.7 L/100km | 9.4 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 | 72 L |
