Toyota Celica 2002 vs Mazda RX-8 2003
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.8 Petrol | 1.3 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 143 HP | 250 HP | |
| Torque: | 170 NM | 216 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 8.7 seconds | 6.5 seconds | |
|
Mazda RX-8 is a more dynamic driving. Toyota Celica engine produces 107 HP less power than Mazda RX-8, whereas torque is 46 NM less than Mazda RX-8. Due to the lower power, Toyota Celica reaches 100 km/h speed 2.2 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.7 | 11.4 | |
|
The Toyota Celica is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Toyota Celica consumes 3.7 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mazda RX-8, which means that by driving the Toyota Celica over 15,000 km in a year you can save 555 litres of fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 55 litres | 61 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 710 km in combined cycle | 530 km in combined cycle | |
| 880 km on highway | 680 km on highway | ||
| Toyota Celica gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | |
| Front-wheel drive cars (Toyota Celica) have better traction on slippery roads and when climbing hills, better fuel economy, and are less expensive to purchase. On the disadvantage side, FWD cars usually have less towing capacity, poorer acceleration and harder handling. Rear-wheel drive cars (Mazda RX-8) have better handling on dry roads, better acceleration, more even weight distribution and more fun to drive. RWD is also better for towing large loads. The cons of rear-wheel drive are less interior and trunk space and more difficulty maneuvering in wet and snowy conditions. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 280'000 km | 160'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used, but under equal conditions the average life of a Toyota Celica engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 12 years | 9 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Toyota Avensis, Toyota Corolla, Toyota RAV4, Toyota Corolla Verso | Used only for this car | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Toyota Celica might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Toyota Celica 2002 1.8 engine: The 1ZZ-FE engine is more advanced, lighter, and simpler than its predecessor, emphasizing fuel efficiency and output. However, these improvements have come at the cost of reduced durability compared to earlier cast-iron engines. The engine block features an open-deck cooling design for easier production and lower ... More about Toyota Celica 2002 1.8 engine Mazda RX-8 2003 1.3 engine: This rotor motor is very specific and capricious. It will suit the true enthusiast who is prepared to put up with high fuel and oil consumption as well as relatively frequent maintenance and repair work. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.35 m | 4.33 m | |
| Width: | 1.74 m | 1.78 m | |
| Height: | 1.32 m | 1.33 m | |
| Toyota Celica is 3 cm longer than the Mazda RX-8, 4 cm narrower, while the height of Toyota Celica is 1 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | 290 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 290 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.4 meters | 10.6 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Toyota Celica is 0.2 metres less than that of the Mazda RX-8. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`200 | 1`820 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 2600 | 4000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Toyota Celica has
|
Mazda RX-8 has
| |