2000 BMW M3 vs. 2011 Toyota Matrix
To start off, 2011 Toyota Matrix is newer by 11 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2000 BMW M3. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2000 BMW M3 would be higher. At 3,168 cc (6 cylinders), 2000 BMW M3 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2000 BMW M3 (325 HP @ 7750 RPM) has 167 more horse power than 2011 Toyota Matrix. (158 HP @ 6000 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2000 BMW M3 should accelerate faster than 2011 Toyota Matrix.
Because 2000 BMW M3 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 2000 BMW M3. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2011 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, 2000 BMW M3 (350 Nm @ 4900 RPM) has 131 more torque (in Nm) than 2011 Toyota Matrix. (219 Nm @ 4000 RPM). This means 2000 BMW M3 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2011 Toyota Matrix.
Compare all specifications:
2000 BMW M3 | 2011 Toyota Matrix | |
Make | BMW | Toyota |
Model | M3 | Matrix |
Year Released | 2000 | 2011 |
Body Type | Coupe | Hatchback |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 3168 cc | 2400 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 325 HP | 158 HP |
Engine RPM | 7750 RPM | 6000 RPM |
Torque | 350 Nm | 219 Nm |
Torque RPM | 4900 RPM | 4000 RPM |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
Number of Seats | 4 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 2 doors | 5 doors |
Vehicle Width | 1790 mm | 1765 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1380 mm | 1549 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2730 mm | 2601 mm |
Fuel Consumption | 8.4 L/100km | 8.4 L/100km |
Fuel Consumption City | 17.8 L/100km | 11.2 L/100km |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 63 L | 50 L |