2000 Chrysler ESX 3 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 Chrysler ESX 3. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2000 Chrysler ESX 3 would be higher. At 2,400 cc (4 cylinders), 2011 Toyota Matrix is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2011 Toyota Matrix (158 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 84 more horse power than 2000 Chrysler ESX 3. (74 HP @ 6400 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2011 Toyota Matrix should accelerate faster than 2000 Chrysler ESX 3.
Both vehicles are front wheel drive (FWD). Which offers better traction when its slippery than rear wheel drive vehicles. 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 Chrysler ESX 3 (332 Nm) has 113 more torque (in Nm) than 2011 Toyota Matrix. (219 Nm). This means 2000 Chrysler ESX 3 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2011 Toyota Matrix.
Compare all specifications:
2000 Chrysler ESX 3 | 2011 Toyota Matrix | |
Make | Chrysler | Toyota |
Model | ESX 3 | Matrix |
Year Released | 2000 | 2011 |
Body Type | Sedan | Hatchback |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1499 cc | 2400 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 74 HP | 158 HP |
Engine RPM | 6400 RPM | 6000 RPM |
Torque | 332 Nm | 219 Nm |
Drive Type | Front | Front |
Transmission Type | Automatic | Automatic |
Number of Seats | 4 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 5 doors |
Vehicle Width | 1890 mm | 1765 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1400 mm | 1549 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 3000 mm | 2601 mm |