Mitsubishi Space Star 2004 vs Hyundai Matrix 2001
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.9 Diesel | 1.5 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 102 HP | 82 HP | |
| Torque: | 215 NM | 184 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12 seconds | 17.9 seconds | |
|
Mitsubishi Space Star is more dynamic to drive. Mitsubishi Space Star engine produces 20 HP more power than Hyundai Matrix, whereas torque is 31 NM more than Hyundai Matrix. Thanks to more power Mitsubishi Space Star reaches 100 km/h speed 5.9 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.5 | 6.0 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.1 l/100km | 6.7 l/100km | |
|
The Mitsubishi Space Star is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mitsubishi Space Star consumes 0.5 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Hyundai Matrix, which means that by driving the Mitsubishi Space Star over 15,000 km in a year you can save 75 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mitsubishi Space Star consumes 0.6 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Hyundai Matrix. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 55 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1000 km in combined cycle | 910 km in combined cycle | |
| 1190 km on highway | 1100 km on highway | ||
| 900 km with real consumption | 820 km with real consumption | ||
| Mitsubishi Space Star gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 8 years | 4 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 11 other car models, including Volvo V40, Renault Laguna, Renault Scenic, Volvo S40, Mitsubishi Carisma | Used also on Hyundai Getz | |
| 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: | no | yes | |
| 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. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.05 m | 4.02 m | |
| Width: | 1.72 m | 1.74 m | |
| Height: | 1.52 m | 1.64 m | |
| Mitsubishi Space Star is 3 cm longer than the Hyundai Matrix, 2 cm narrower, while the height of Mitsubishi Space Star is 12 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | 350 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1284 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.4 meters | 10.4 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`300 | 1`840 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | average | |
| Average price (€): | 1000 | 1000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mitsubishi Space Star has
|
| |