2001 Fiat Stilo vs. 2012 Toyota Matrix
To start off, 2012 Toyota Matrix is newer by 11 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2001 Fiat Stilo. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2001 Fiat Stilo would be higher. At 1,800 cc (4 cylinders), 2012 Toyota Matrix is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2012 Toyota Matrix (132 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 1 more horse power than 2001 Fiat Stilo. (131 HP @ 6400 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2012 Toyota Matrix should accelerate faster than 2001 Fiat Stilo.
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, 2012 Toyota Matrix (173 Nm @ 4400 RPM) has 11 more torque (in Nm) than 2001 Fiat Stilo. (162 Nm @ 3500 RPM). This means 2012 Toyota Matrix will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2001 Fiat Stilo. 2012 Toyota Matrix has automatic transmission and 2001 Fiat Stilo has manual transmission. 2001 Fiat Stilo will offer better control over acceleration and deceleration in addition to better fuel efficiency overall. 2012 Toyota Matrix will be easier to drive especially in heavy traffic.
Compare all specifications:
| 2001 Fiat Stilo | 2012 Toyota Matrix | |
| Make | Fiat | Toyota |
| Model | Stilo | Matrix |
| Year Released | 2001 | 2012 |
| Body Type | Hatchback | Hatchback |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1747 cc | 1800 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 131 HP | 132 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6400 RPM | 6000 RPM |
| Torque | 162 Nm | 173 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 3500 RPM | 4400 RPM |
| Drive Type | Front | Front |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Automatic |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 3 doors | 5 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 4190 mm | 4366 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1790 mm | 1765 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1480 mm | 1549 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2550 mm | 2601 mm |
| Fuel Consumption | 6.1 L/100km | 7.4 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 11.3 L/100km | 9 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 58 L | 50 L |
