Mazda Eunos 800: which version to buy (2.3 AT vs 2.5 AT)
If you are choosing a Mazda Eunos 800, the catalogue has one generation (October 1993–June 1997) and two named versions: 2.3 AT and 2.5 AT. Both are Sedan, Gasoline, V-shaped 6-cylinder, Automatic 4-speed, FWD. The buy decision is not “which generation” — there is only 1 generation. It is which engine: 2.3 AT at 220 hp / 294 Nm and 1520 kg kerb, or 2.5 AT at 200 hp / 223 Nm and 1440 kg kerb.
If you are choosing a Mazda Eunos 800, the catalogue has one generation (October 1993–June 1997) and two named versions: 2.3 AT and 2.5 AT. Both are Sedan, Gasoline, V-shaped 6-cylinder, Automatic 4-speed, FWD. The buy decision is not “which generation” — there is only 1 generation. It is which engine: 2.3 AT at 220 hp / 294 Nm and 1520 kg kerb, or 2.5 AT at 200 hp / 223 Nm and 1440 kg kerb. Acceleration to 100, top speed, and fuel use are not measured for either, so the comparison below is only the figures given.
Eunos 800 specs: one generation, two versions
1 generation of the Mazda Eunos 800 ran from 1993-10-01 to 1997-06-30 as a Sedan with 2 versions. There is no second generation and no restyle listed as a separate generation. Both 2.3 AT and 2.5 AT share those same start and stop dates, so you are not choosing a later facelift with different years — you are choosing displacement, peak power, peak torque, and kerb weight inside one production window.
Engine comparison: 2.3 AT vs 2.5 AT
On paper the larger engine is 2.5 AT (2496 cm³) and the smaller is 2.3 AT (2254 cm³). The numbers reverse the usual “bigger engine, more power” pattern.
2.3 AT makes 220 hp (162 kW) at 5500 rpm and 294 Nm at 3500 rpm from 2254 cm³. Fuel is 95. Cylinders: 6, layout V-shaped, 4 valves per cylinder, boost No. Engine position Front, transverse. Feed: Distributed injection (multi-point). Compression 10. Bore and stroke 80.3 × 74.2. Gearbox Automatic, 4 speeds. Drive FWD.
2.5 AT makes 200 hp (147 kW) at 6500 rpm and 223 Nm at 4800 rpm from 2496 cm³. Fuel is 95. Cylinders: 6, layout V-shaped, 4 valves per cylinder, boost No. Engine position Front, transverse. Feed: Distributed injection (multi-point). Compression 10. Bore and stroke 84.5 × 74.2. Gearbox Automatic, 4 speeds. Drive FWD.
Arithmetic on those figures:
| Version | Displacement | hp | kW | Nm | hp per litre | Nm per litre | Peak hp rpm | Peak Nm rpm |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2.3 AT | 2254 | 220 | 162 | 294 | 97.6 hp/L | 130.4 Nm/L | 5500 | 3500 |
| 2.5 AT | 2496 | 200 | 147 | 223 | 80.1 hp/L | 89.3 Nm/L | 6500 | 4800 |
2.3 AT has 242 cm³ less capacity than 2.5 AT (2254 versus 2496) but 20 hp more (220 versus 200) and 71 Nm more (294 versus 223). That is 10% more peak power and 31.8% more peak torque on 9.7% less displacement. Specific output is 17.5 hp/L higher on 2.3 AT (97.6 versus 80.1) and 41.1 Nm/L higher (130.4 versus 89.3).
Stroke is the same number in both (74.2). Bore is not: 2.3 AT is 80.3 × 74.2, 2.5 AT is 84.5 × 74.2 — 4.2 mm more bore on the 2496 cm³ unit. Compression is 10 on both. Boost is No on both. Cylinders, V-shaped layout, 4 valves per cylinder, Front, transverse placement, Distributed injection (multi-point), Automatic 4, and FWD are identical. The buy split is therefore not gearbox, drive, fuel type, or cylinder count. It is how much power and torque each litre delivers, and at what rpm those peaks are quoted.
2.3 AT quotes peak power 1000 rpm earlier than 2.5 AT (5500 versus 6500) and peak torque 1300 rpm earlier (3500 versus 4800). If the extra money were for the larger 2496 cm³ unit, the catalogue numbers do not show extra peak hp or extra peak Nm for that money; they show 20 hp and 71 Nm less at higher rpm.
Mazda Eunos 800 engine table (all versions)
| Version | hp | Nm | cm³ | Fuel | Cylinders | Layout | Boost | Gearbox | Drive |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2.3 AT | 220 | 294 | 2254 | 95 | 6 | V-shaped | No | Automatic 4 | FWD |
| 2.5 AT | 200 | 223 | 2496 | 95 | 6 | V-shaped | No | Automatic 4 | FWD |
Performance, mpg, and what is not measured
0–100, top speed, city consumption, highway consumption, mixed consumption, CO2, and eco class are not measured for 2.3 AT and not measured for 2.5 AT. There is no mpg figure in the data, so neither version can be ranked on fuel use. There is no 0–100 figure, so neither version can be ranked on sprint time. There is no top speed, so neither version can be ranked on maximum speed.
What can be ranked without inventing those tests is power-to-weight from kerb mass and listed hp:
- 2.3 AT: 1520 kg / 220 hp = 6.91 kg per hp (0.145 hp per kg).
- 2.5 AT: 1440 kg / 200 hp = 7.20 kg per kg of horsepower wait: 1440 / 200 = 7.20 kg per hp (0.139 hp per kg).
2.3 AT is 80 kg heavier than 2.5 AT (1520 versus 1440) but still has a lower kg-per-hp number (6.91 versus 7.20) because the 20 hp gap more than offsets the 80 kg gap. 80 kg on 1440 kg is 5.6% more kerb on 2.3 AT; 20 hp on 200 hp is 10% more power. Torque-to-weight:
- 2.3 AT: 1520 kg / 294 Nm = 5.17 kg per Nm.
- 2.5 AT: 1440 kg / 223 Nm = 6.46 kg per Nm.
On that ratio 2.3 AT is clearly the stronger of the two Automatic FWD Sedans in this generation. Reliability, common problems, and running-cost data are not measured in this dataset; this article does not assign a reliability winner.
Dimensions, weight, tank, wheels
Gross weight is not measured for 2.3 AT and not measured for 2.5 AT. Wheel size is not measured for both. Ground clearance is 140 mm on both. Fuel tank is 68 L on both. Front suspension Independent, spring; rear Independent, spring — both versions. Front brakes Ventilated disc; rear Disc — both versions.
The only measured mass difference is kerb weight: 2.3 AT 1520 kg, 2.5 AT 1440 kg. 2.3 AT carries 80 kg more. Tank, clearance, suspension labels, and brake labels do not change with the engine name, so they do not decide the purchase between 2.3 AT and 2.5 AT. If you need a stated gross weight or a wheel size, neither version supplies it here.
Which version to choose
There is one generation and two Automatic FWD Gasoline Sedan versions. No third gearbox, no AWD, no extra body type. The choice is 2.3 AT or 2.5 AT.
Choose 2.3 AT if the numbers you care about are peak power, peak torque, specific output, and kg per hp. 2.3 AT is 220 hp versus 200 hp, 294 Nm versus 223 Nm, 97.6 hp/L versus 80.1 hp/L, 6.91 kg/hp versus 7.20 kg/hp, with peaks at 5500 rpm / 3500 rpm instead of 6500 / 4800. You accept 80 kg extra kerb (1520 versus 1440) and 242 cm³ less displacement (2254 versus 2496). Bore is 80.3 versus 84.5; stroke stays 74.2; compression stays 10; boost stays No.
Choose 2.5 AT if the number you care about is the lower kerb weight and the larger displacement label. 2.5 AT is 1440 kg versus 1520 kg (−80 kg) and 2496 cm³ versus 2254 cm³ (+242 cm³, +10.7%). You give up 20 hp, 71 Nm, 17.5 hp/L of specific output, and you move peak torque 1300 rpm higher and peak power 1000 rpm higher. Gearbox remains Automatic 4, drive remains FWD, tank remains 68 L, clearance remains 140 mm.
What the extra displacement does not buy in this catalogue: more listed hp, more listed Nm, a different gearbox, a different drive, a later generation, a restyle with its own years, a measured 0–100, a measured top speed, or a measured mpg. Those are either identical or not measured.
If you sort only by listed horsepower, 2.3 AT is first (220). If you sort only by listed torque, 2.3 AT is first (294). If you sort only by displacement, 2.5 AT is first (2496). If you sort only by kerb weight, 2.5 AT is first (1440). If you sort by hp per litre or Nm per litre or kg per hp, 2.3 AT is first. With only 1 generation and 2 versions, that is the full comparison the data supports.
2.3 AT and 2.5 AT both use fuel 95, 6 cylinders V-shaped, 4 valves per cylinder, boost No, Front, transverse, Distributed injection (multi-point), Automatic 4, FWD, Independent, spring front and rear, Ventilated disc front, Disc rear, 68 L tank, 140 mm clearance. None of those items breaks the tie. The tie-breakers that exist in the data are 220 vs 200 hp, 294 vs 223 Nm, 2254 vs 2496 cm³, 1520 vs 1440 kg, 80.3 × 74.2 vs 84.5 × 74.2, and 5500/3500 rpm vs 6500/4800 rpm.
Prices are not in the data, so “extra money” here means extra displacement and extra kerb or extra listed output — not a currency figure. Problems and reliability are not measured. Performance times and mpg are not measured. For a Mazda Eunos 800 in this catalogue, the version to buy on output-per-kilo and output-per-litre is 2.3 AT; the version to buy on lower kerb and larger cm³ is 2.5 AT.