| 1 | 0 | 3 | 4 | 3 | 4 |
2012 Mazda CX-9 and 2003 Mazda RX-8 Specifications
| Model Year | 2012 | 2003 | |
| Model | Mazda CX-9 | Mazda RX-8 | |
| Engine | |||
| Transmission | |||
| Drivetrain | |||
| Body | |||
| Difference | |||
| Total Legroom | 0 in (over 1 rows) | 0 in (over 1 rows) | 0 in |
What Our Members Are Saying about the Seat Room and Comfort of the 2012 Mazda CX-9
| 2012 Mazda CX-9 Seat Room and Comfort: Pros | ||
| Year | Body/Powertrain | Comment |
| 2011 | 4dr SUV 273-horsepower 3.7L V6 6-speed shiftable automatic FWD |
Seat hugs in the right places without being cumbersome. Headrest position is much better than the midsize GM vehicles I test-drove (Chevy Traverse, GMC Acadia, Buick Enclave). see full Mazda CX-9 review |
What Our Members Are Saying about the Seat Room and Comfort of the 2003 Mazda RX-8
| 2003 Mazda RX-8 Seat Room and Comfort: Pros | ||
| Year | Body/Powertrain | Comment |
| 2004 | 4dr Coupe 238-horsepower 1.3L R2 6-speed manual RWD |
Exactly what I needed to drive my wife and daughter and occasional 4th person see full Mazda RX-8 review |
| 2004 | 4dr Coupe 197-horsepower 1.3L R2 4-speed shiftable automatic RWD |
It is good enough to take adults for short distances, children as far as you can stand them. Footroom is the tightest dimension. The narrowing sides and small windows make claustrophobics nervous. see full Mazda RX-8 review |
See TrueDelta's information for all SUVs
See TrueDelta's information for all Mazda models.
