2004 Mazda MPV vs. 2012 Toyota Matrix
To start off, 2012 Toyota Matrix is newer by 8 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2004 Mazda MPV. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2004 Mazda MPV would be higher. At 2,966 cc (6 cylinders), 2004 Mazda MPV is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2004 Mazda MPV (200 HP @ 4000 RPM) has 42 more horse power than 2012 Toyota Matrix. (158 HP @ 6000 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2004 Mazda MPV should accelerate faster than 2012 Toyota Matrix.
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, 2004 Mazda MPV (260 Nm) has 41 more torque (in Nm) than 2012 Toyota Matrix. (219 Nm). This means 2004 Mazda MPV will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2012 Toyota Matrix.
Compare all specifications:
2004 Mazda MPV | 2012 Toyota Matrix | |
Make | Mazda | Toyota |
Model | MPV | Matrix |
Year Released | 2004 | 2012 |
Body Type | Minivan | Hatchback |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 2966 cc | 2400 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 200 HP | 158 HP |
Engine RPM | 4000 RPM | 6000 RPM |
Torque | 260 Nm | 219 Nm |
Drive Type | Front | Front |
Number of Seats | 7 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 5 doors | 5 doors |
Vehicle Width | 1840 mm | 1765 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1750 mm | 1549 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2760 mm | 2601 mm |
Fuel Consumption Highway | 9.4 L/100km | 8.4 L/100km |
Fuel Consumption City | 13.1 L/100km | 11.2 L/100km |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 75 L | 50 L |