2011 Chevrolet Malibu vs. 2012 Toyota Matrix
To start off, 2012 Toyota Matrix is newer by 1 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2011 Chevrolet Malibu. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2011 Chevrolet Malibu would be higher. At 2,400 cc (4 cylinders), 2011 Chevrolet Malibu is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2011 Chevrolet Malibu (169 HP @ 6400 RPM) has 37 more horse power than 2012 Toyota Matrix. (132 HP @ 6000 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2011 Chevrolet Malibu should accelerate faster than 2012 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, 2011 Chevrolet Malibu (217 Nm @ 4500 RPM) has 44 more torque (in Nm) than 2012 Toyota Matrix. (173 Nm @ 4400 RPM). This means 2011 Chevrolet Malibu will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2012 Toyota Matrix.
Compare all specifications:
| 2011 Chevrolet Malibu | 2012 Toyota Matrix | |
| Make | Chevrolet | Toyota |
| Model | Malibu | Matrix |
| Year Released | 2011 | 2012 |
| Body Type | Sedan | Hatchback |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2400 cc | 1800 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 169 HP | 132 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6400 RPM | 6000 RPM |
| Torque | 217 Nm | 173 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 4500 RPM | 4400 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Front | Front |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | Automatic |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 5 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 4872 mm | 4366 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1786 mm | 1765 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1450 mm | 1549 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2852 mm | 2601 mm |
| Fuel Consumption | 7.1 L/100km | 7.4 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 10.7 L/100km | 9 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 61 L | 50 L |
