1953 Hudson Super Jet vs. 2005 Toyota Matrix
To start off, 2005 Toyota Matrix is newer by 52 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1953 Hudson Super Jet. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1953 Hudson Super Jet would be higher. At 3,303 cc (6 cylinders), 1953 Hudson Super Jet is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2005 Toyota Matrix (130 HP @ 5200 RPM) has 16 more horse power than 1953 Hudson Super Jet. (114 HP @ 4000 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2005 Toyota Matrix should accelerate faster than 1953 Hudson Super Jet. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1953 Hudson Super Jet weights approximately 253 kg more than 2005 Toyota Matrix.
Because 1953 Hudson Super Jet 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 1953 Hudson Super Jet. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2005 Toyota Matrix, 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, 1953 Hudson Super Jet (252 Nm) has 82 more torque (in Nm) than 2005 Toyota Matrix. (170 Nm). This means 1953 Hudson Super Jet will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2005 Toyota Matrix.
Compare all specifications:
| 1953 Hudson Super Jet | 2005 Toyota Matrix | |
| Make | Hudson | Toyota |
| Model | Super Jet | Matrix |
| Year Released | 1953 | 2005 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 3303 cc | 1786 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 114 HP | 130 HP |
| Engine RPM | 4000 RPM | 5200 RPM |
| Torque | 252 Nm | 170 Nm |
| Engine Bore Size | 76.2 mm | 79.1 mm |
| Engine Stroke Size | 120.7 mm | 91 mm |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 8.0:1 | 10.0:1 |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Vehicle Weight | 1478 kg | 1225 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4600 mm | 4360 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1710 mm | 1780 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1550 mm | 1550 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2670 mm | 2500 mm |
