2009 Saturn Outlook vs. 2006 Toyota Aygo
To start off, 2009 Saturn Outlook is newer by 3 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2006 Toyota Aygo. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2006 Toyota Aygo would be higher. At 3,564 cc (6 cylinders), 2009 Saturn Outlook is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2009 Saturn Outlook (277 HP) has 224 more horse power than 2006 Toyota Aygo. (53 HP). In normal driving conditions, 2009 Saturn Outlook should accelerate faster than 2006 Toyota Aygo.
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, 2009 Saturn Outlook (253 Nm @ 5500 RPM) has 121 more torque (in Nm) than 2006 Toyota Aygo. (132 Nm @ 1750 RPM). This means 2009 Saturn Outlook will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2006 Toyota Aygo. 2009 Saturn Outlook has automatic transmission and 2006 Toyota Aygo has manual transmission. 2006 Toyota Aygo will offer better control over acceleration and deceleration in addition to better fuel efficiency overall. 2009 Saturn Outlook will be easier to drive especially in heavy traffic.
Compare all specifications:
| 2009 Saturn Outlook | 2006 Toyota Aygo | |
| Make | Saturn | Toyota |
| Model | Outlook | Aygo |
| Year Released | 2009 | 2006 |
| Body Type | SUV | Hatchback |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 3564 cc | 1398 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 2 valves |
| Horse Power | 277 HP | 53 HP |
| Torque | 253 Nm | 132 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 5500 RPM | 1750 RPM |
| Drive Type | Front | Front |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | Manual |
| Number of Seats | 8 seats | 4 seats |
| Vehicle Width | 1990 mm | 1615 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Highway | 9.8 L/100km | 3.4 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 13.8 L/100km | 5.3 L/100km |
