2011 Toyota Matrix vs. 2013 Ford F-150
To start off, 2013 Ford F-150 is newer by 2 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2011 Toyota Matrix. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2011 Toyota Matrix would be higher. At 5,000 cc (8 cylinders), 2013 Ford F-150 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2013 Ford F-150 (355 HP @ 5500 RPM) has 197 more horse power than 2011 Toyota Matrix. (158 HP @ 6000 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2013 Ford F-150 should accelerate faster than 2011 Toyota Matrix.
Because 2013 Ford F-150 is all wheel drive (AWD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2011 Toyota Matrix. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2013 Ford F-150 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, 2013 Ford F-150 (515 Nm @ 4250 RPM) has 296 more torque (in Nm) than 2011 Toyota Matrix. (219 Nm @ 4000 RPM). This means 2013 Ford F-150 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2011 Toyota Matrix.
Compare all specifications:
| 2011 Toyota Matrix | 2013 Ford F-150 | |
| Make | Toyota | Ford |
| Model | Matrix | F-150 |
| Year Released | 2011 | 2013 |
| Body Type | Hatchback | Pickup |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2400 cc | 5000 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 158 HP | 355 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6000 RPM | 5500 RPM |
| Torque | 219 Nm | 515 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 4000 RPM | 4250 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Flex Fuel |
| Drive Type | Front | AWD |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | 6-speed automatic |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 3 seats |
| Number of Doors | 5 doors | 2 doors |
| Vehicle Width | 1765 mm | 2464 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1549 mm | 1928 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2601 mm | 3683 mm |
| Fuel Consumption | 8.4 L/100km | 10.5 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 11.2 L/100km | 15 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 50 L | 136 L |
