2008 Acura RL vs. 2012 Toyota Matrix
To start off, 2012 Toyota Matrix is newer by 4 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2008 Acura RL. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2008 Acura RL would be higher. At 3,471 cc (6 cylinders), 2008 Acura RL is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2008 Acura RL (290 HP @ 6200 RPM) has 132 more horse power than 2012 Toyota Matrix. (158 HP @ 6000 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2008 Acura RL should accelerate faster than 2012 Toyota Matrix.
Because 2008 Acura RL 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, 2008 Acura RL 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, 2008 Acura RL (347 Nm @ 5000 RPM) has 128 more torque (in Nm) than 2012 Toyota Matrix. (219 Nm @ 4000 RPM). This means 2008 Acura RL will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2012 Toyota Matrix.
Compare all specifications:
2008 Acura RL | 2012 Toyota Matrix | |
Make | Acura | Toyota |
Model | RL | Matrix |
Year Released | 2008 | 2012 |
Body Type | Sedan | Hatchback |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 3471 cc | 2400 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 290 HP | 158 HP |
Engine RPM | 6200 RPM | 6000 RPM |
Torque | 347 Nm | 219 Nm |
Torque RPM | 5000 RPM | 4000 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | 4WD | Front |
Transmission Type | Automatic | Automatic |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 5 doors |
Vehicle Width | 1850 mm | 1765 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1460 mm | 1549 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2810 mm | 2601 mm |
Fuel Consumption Highway | 9.8 L/100km | 8.4 L/100km |
Fuel Consumption City | 14.7 L/100km | 11.2 L/100km |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 73 L | 50 L |