Hyundai Matrix 2004 vs Mitsubishi Space Star 2004
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.5 Diesel | 1.9 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing belt | |
| Engine chain usually needs to be replaced less often than the timing belt, but the cost of replacing the chain is usually higher. Chain motors are considered to be more reliable, but noisier and more vibration generating. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 102 HP | 115 HP | |
| Torque: | 235 NM | 265 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 14.3 seconds | 10.5 seconds | |
|
Mitsubishi Space Star is a more dynamic driving. Hyundai Matrix engine produces 13 HP less power than Mitsubishi Space Star, whereas torque is 30 NM less than Mitsubishi Space Star. Due to the lower power, Hyundai Matrix reaches 100 km/h speed 3.8 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.4 | 5.5 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.3 l/100km | 6.0 l/100km | |
|
The Mitsubishi Space Star is a better choice in terms of fuel economy based on user-reported consumption, although the specification shows otherwise. By specification Hyundai Matrix consumes 0.1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi Space Star, which means that by driving the Hyundai Matrix over 15,000 km in a year you can save 15 litres of fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Hyundai Matrix consumes 0.3 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi Space Star. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 55 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1010 km in combined cycle | 1000 km in combined cycle | |
| 870 km with real consumption | 910 km with real consumption | ||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 6 years | 8 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Hyundai Getz, Hyundai Accent, Kia RIO, Kia Cerato | Installed on at least 11 other car models, including Volvo V40, Renault Laguna, Renault Scenic, Volvo S40, Mitsubishi Carisma | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Mitsubishi Space Star might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The Hyundai Matrix engine has hydraulic tappets (lifters), providing quieter operation and no need for periodic adjustment, but they are more complex in design and can cause serious engine damage in case of failure. | |||
| Mitsubishi Space Star 2004 1.9 engine: Long-lasting and fuel-efficient engine. Maintaining oil change and maintenance intervals is essential for a long engine life, as poor or untimely oil changes can result in turbine and oil pump damage, followed ... More about Mitsubishi Space Star 2004 1.9 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.02 m | 4.05 m | |
| Width: | 1.74 m | 1.72 m | |
| Height: | 1.64 m | 1.52 m | |
| Hyundai Matrix is 3 cm shorter than the Mitsubishi Space Star, 2 cm wider, while the height of Hyundai Matrix is 12 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 354 litres | no data | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1284 litres | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | no data | 10.4 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`840 | 1`300 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | average | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 1000 | 1000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Hyundai Matrix has
|
Mitsubishi Space Star has
| |