2008 Mercury Milan vs. 2011 Toyota Matrix
To start off, 2011 Toyota Matrix is newer by 3 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2008 Mercury Milan. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2008 Mercury Milan would be higher. At 2,261 cc (4 cylinders), 2008 Mercury Milan is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2008 Mercury Milan (160 HP @ 6250 RPM) has 28 more horse power than 2011 Toyota Matrix. (132 HP @ 6000 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2008 Mercury Milan should accelerate faster than 2011 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, 2008 Mercury Milan (213 Nm @ 4250 RPM) has 40 more torque (in Nm) than 2011 Toyota Matrix. (173 Nm @ 4400 RPM). This means 2008 Mercury Milan will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2011 Toyota Matrix.
Compare all specifications:
| 2008 Mercury Milan | 2011 Toyota Matrix | |
| Make | Mercury | Toyota |
| Model | Milan | Matrix |
| Year Released | 2008 | 2011 |
| Body Type | Sedan | Hatchback |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2261 cc | 1800 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 160 HP | 132 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6250 RPM | 6000 RPM |
| Torque | 213 Nm | 173 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 4250 RPM | 4400 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Diesel | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Front | Front |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 5 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 4870 mm | 4366 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1840 mm | 1765 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1460 mm | 1549 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2730 mm | 2601 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Highway | 8.1 L/100km | 7.4 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 11.8 L/100km | 9 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 66 L | 50 L |
