2007 Honda Accord vs. 2012 Toyota Matrix
To start off, 2012 Toyota Matrix is newer by 5 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2007 Honda Accord. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2007 Honda Accord would be higher. At 2,400 cc (4 cylinders), 2012 Toyota Matrix is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2007 Honda Accord (166 HP @ 5800 RPM) has 8 more horse power than 2012 Toyota Matrix. (158 HP @ 6000 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2007 Honda Accord should accelerate faster than 2012 Toyota Matrix.
Because 2007 Honda Accord is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2012 Toyota Matrix. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2007 Honda Accord 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, 2012 Toyota Matrix (219 Nm @ 4000 RPM) has 2 more torque (in Nm) than 2007 Honda Accord. (217 Nm @ 4000 RPM). This means 2012 Toyota Matrix will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2007 Honda Accord.
Compare all specifications:
| 2007 Honda Accord | 2012 Toyota Matrix | |
| Make | Honda | Toyota |
| Model | Accord | Matrix |
| Year Released | 2007 | 2012 |
| Body Type | Coupe | Hatchback |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2353 cc | 2400 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 166 HP | 158 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5800 RPM | 6000 RPM |
| Torque | 217 Nm | 219 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 4000 RPM | 4000 RPM |
| Drive Type | 4WD | Front |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 5 doors |
| Vehicle Width | 1820 mm | 1765 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1420 mm | 1549 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2680 mm | 2601 mm |
| Fuel Consumption | 6.9 L/100km | 8.4 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 9.1 L/100km | 11.2 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 65 L | 50 L |
