2009 Mazda RX-8 vs. 2007 Dodge Charger RT Concept
To start off, 2009 Mazda RX-8 is newer by 2 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2007 Dodge Charger RT Concept. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2007 Dodge Charger RT Concept would be higher. At 3,522 cc (8 cylinders), 2007 Dodge Charger RT Concept is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2007 Dodge Charger RT Concept (791 HP @ 5000 RPM) has 559 more horse power than 2009 Mazda RX-8. (232 HP @ 8500 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2007 Dodge Charger RT Concept should accelerate faster than 2009 Mazda RX-8.
Both vehicles are rear wheel drive (RWD) - it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, both vehicles do the job better than front wheel drive vehicles. 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 Dodge Charger RT Concept (800 Nm @ 5000 RPM) has 584 more torque (in Nm) than 2009 Mazda RX-8. (216 Nm @ 5500 RPM). This means 2007 Dodge Charger RT Concept will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2009 Mazda RX-8. 2007 Dodge Charger RT Concept has automatic transmission and 2009 Mazda RX-8 has manual transmission. 2009 Mazda RX-8 will offer better control over acceleration and deceleration in addition to better fuel efficiency overall. 2007 Dodge Charger RT Concept will be easier to drive especially in heavy traffic.
Compare all specifications:
| 2009 Mazda RX-8 | 2007 Dodge Charger RT Concept | |
| Make | Mazda | Dodge |
| Model | RX-8 | Charger RT Concept |
| Year Released | 2009 | 2007 |
| Body Type | Coupe | Sedan |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1306 cc | 3522 cc |
| Engine Type | dual-disk rotary | V |
| Horse Power | 232 HP | 791 HP |
| Engine RPM | 8500 RPM | 5000 RPM |
| Torque | 216 Nm | 800 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 5500 RPM | 5000 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Automatic |
| Number of Seats | 4 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 4 doors |
| Fuel Consumption | 10.7 L/100km | 11.2 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 14.7 L/100km | 9 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 13.1 L/100km | 10.2 L/100km |
