2009 Kia Cee'd vs. 2005 Toyota Matrix
To start off, 2009 Kia Cee'd is newer by 4 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2005 Toyota Matrix. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2005 Toyota Matrix would be higher. At 1,786 cc (4 cylinders), 2005 Toyota Matrix is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2005 Toyota Matrix (130 HP @ 5200 RPM) has 6 more horse power than 2009 Kia Cee'd. (124 HP @ 6200 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2005 Toyota Matrix should accelerate faster than 2009 Kia Cee'd. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2009 Kia Cee'd weights approximately 92 kg more than 2005 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, 2005 Toyota Matrix (170 Nm) has 15 more torque (in Nm) than 2009 Kia Cee'd. (155 Nm). This means 2005 Toyota Matrix will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2009 Kia Cee'd.
Compare all specifications:
2009 Kia Cee'd | 2005 Toyota Matrix | |
Make | Kia | Toyota |
Model | Cee'd | Matrix |
Year Released | 2009 | 2005 |
Body Type | Hatchback | Hatchback |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1591 cc | 1786 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 124 HP | 130 HP |
Engine RPM | 6200 RPM | 5200 RPM |
Torque | 155 Nm | 170 Nm |
Engine Bore Size | 77 mm | 79.1 mm |
Engine Stroke Size | 85.4 mm | 91 mm |
Drive Type | Front | Front |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 5 doors | 5 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 1317 kg | 1225 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4480 mm | 4360 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1800 mm | 1780 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1530 mm | 1550 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2660 mm | 2500 mm |
Fuel Consumption Overall | 6.5 L/100km | 7.1 L/100km |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 53 L | 50 L |