2004 Buick Rainier vs. 2011 Toyota Matrix
To start off, 2011 Toyota Matrix is newer by 7 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2004 Buick Rainier. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2004 Buick Rainier would be higher. At 4,195 cc (6 cylinders), 2004 Buick Rainier is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2004 Buick Rainier (276 HP @ 5200 RPM) has 144 more horse power than 2011 Toyota Matrix. (132 HP @ 6000 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2004 Buick Rainier should accelerate faster than 2011 Toyota Matrix.
Because 2004 Buick Rainier is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2011 Toyota Matrix. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2004 Buick Rainier will offer significantly more control. 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, 2004 Buick Rainier (380 Nm) has 207 more torque (in Nm) than 2011 Toyota Matrix. (173 Nm). This means 2004 Buick Rainier will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2011 Toyota Matrix.
Compare all specifications:
| 2004 Buick Rainier | 2011 Toyota Matrix | |
| Make | Buick | Toyota |
| Model | Rainier | Matrix |
| Year Released | 2004 | 2011 |
| Body Type | SUV | Hatchback |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 4195 cc | 1800 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 276 HP | 132 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5200 RPM | 6000 RPM |
| Torque | 380 Nm | 173 Nm |
| Drive Type | 4WD | Front |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 5 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 4880 mm | 4366 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1920 mm | 1765 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1900 mm | 1549 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2880 mm | 2601 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Highway | 11.2 L/100km | 7.4 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 15.7 L/100km | 9 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 83 L | 50 L |
