Nissan Cube 1998 vs Hyundai Matrix 2004
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.3 Petrol | 1.6 Petrol | |
| 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: | 82 HP | 103 HP | |
| Torque: | 106 NM | 141 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | n/a seconds | 12.7 seconds | |
| Nissan Cube engine produces 21 HP less power than Hyundai Matrix, whereas torque is 35 NM less than Hyundai Matrix. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.4 | 8.0 | |
|
The Nissan Cube is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Nissan Cube consumes 1.6 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Hyundai Matrix, which means that by driving the Nissan Cube over 15,000 km in a year you can save 240 litres of fuel. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 11 years | 12 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | Installed on at least 6 other car models, including Hyundai Getz, Hyundai Elantra, Hyundai Accent, Kia RIO, Kia Cerato | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Hyundai Matrix 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: | 3.75 m | 4.02 m | |
| Width: | 1.61 m | 1.74 m | |
| Height: | 1.63 m | 1.64 m | |
|
Nissan Cube is smaller. Nissan Cube is 27 cm shorter than the Hyundai Matrix, 13 cm narrower, while the height of Nissan Cube is 1 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | 350 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down, if possible |
no data | 1284 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | no data | no data | |
| Gross weight: | 1`290 kg | 1`800 kg | |
| Net weight: | 960 kg | 1`323 kg | |
| Load capacity: | 330 kg | 477 kg | |
| Nissan Cube load capacity (permitted cargo and passenger weight) is par apmēram 45 procentiem less than Hyundai Matrix. Therefore, Hyundai Matrix is more suitable for longer family trips or transporting heavier loads. | |||
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | average | |
| Average price (€): | no data | 1000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Nissan Cube has
|
Hyundai Matrix has
| |