2003 Daihatsu Charade vs. 2012 Toyota Matrix
To start off, 2012 Toyota Matrix is newer by 9 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2003 Daihatsu Charade. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2003 Daihatsu Charade would be higher. At 2,400 cc (4 cylinders), 2012 Toyota Matrix is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2012 Toyota Matrix (158 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 101 more horse power than 2003 Daihatsu Charade. (57 HP @ 6000 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2012 Toyota Matrix should accelerate faster than 2003 Daihatsu Charade.
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 (219 Nm @ 4000 RPM) has 129 more torque (in Nm) than 2003 Daihatsu Charade. (90 Nm @ 4000 RPM). This means 2012 Toyota Matrix will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2003 Daihatsu Charade.
Compare all specifications:
2003 Daihatsu Charade | 2012 Toyota Matrix | |
Make | Daihatsu | Toyota |
Model | Charade | Matrix |
Year Released | 2003 | 2012 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 989 cc | 2400 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 3 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 57 HP | 158 HP |
Engine RPM | 6000 RPM | 6000 RPM |
Torque | 90 Nm | 219 Nm |
Torque RPM | 4000 RPM | 4000 RPM |
Drive Type | Front | Front |
Transmission Type | Automatic | Automatic |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 5 doors | 5 doors |
Vehicle Width | 1480 mm | 1765 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1510 mm | 1549 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2370 mm | 2601 mm |
Fuel Consumption | 5.1 L/100km | 8.4 L/100km |
Fuel Consumption City | 7.3 L/100km | 11.2 L/100km |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 36 L | 50 L |