2004 Pontiac Montana vs. 2012 Suzuki Equator
To start off, 2012 Suzuki Equator is newer by 8 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2004 Pontiac Montana. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2004 Pontiac Montana would be higher. At 3,953 cc (6 cylinders), 2012 Suzuki Equator is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2012 Suzuki Equator (261 HP @ 5600 RPM) has 76 more horse power than 2004 Pontiac Montana. (185 HP @ 5200 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2012 Suzuki Equator should accelerate faster than 2004 Pontiac Montana. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2004 Pontiac Montana weights approximately 715 kg more than 2012 Suzuki Equator.
Both vehicles are four wheel drive (4WD) - it offers better handling, traction, and control in all driving conditions compared with front wheel drive or 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 Suzuki Equator (381 Nm) has 83 more torque (in Nm) than 2004 Pontiac Montana. (298 Nm). This means 2012 Suzuki Equator will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2004 Pontiac Montana.
Compare all specifications:
| 2004 Pontiac Montana | 2012 Suzuki Equator | |
| Make | Pontiac | Suzuki |
| Model | Montana | Equator |
| Year Released | 2004 | 2012 |
| Body Type | Minivan | Pickup |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 3392 cc | 3953 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 185 HP | 261 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5200 RPM | 5600 RPM |
| Torque | 298 Nm | 381 Nm |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 9.5:1 | 9.5:1 |
| Drive Type | 4WD | 4WD |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | Automatic |
| Number of Seats | 7 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 2010 kg | 1295 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 5120 mm | 5600 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1850 mm | 1860 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1740 mm | 1790 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 3050 mm | 3560 mm |
| Fuel Consumption | 9.8 L/100km | 11.8 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 13.1 L/100km | 15.7 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 11.8 L/100km | 7.2 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 95 L | 80 L |
