Renault Kangoo 2003 vs Hyundai Matrix 2004
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.5 Diesel | 1.5 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing chain | |
| Timing belt usually needs to be replaced more often than the chain, but it is usually significantly cheaper. Timing belt motors are generally quieter and less vibrating than chain motors. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 65 HP | 102 HP | |
| Torque: | 160 NM | 235 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 16.3 seconds | 14.3 seconds | |
|
Hyundai Matrix is a more dynamic driving. Renault Kangoo engine produces 37 HP less power than Hyundai Matrix, whereas torque is 75 NM less than Hyundai Matrix. Due to the lower power, Renault Kangoo reaches 100 km/h speed 2 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.5 | 5.4 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 5.6 l/100km | 6.3 l/100km | |
|
The Renault Kangoo is a better choice in terms of fuel economy based on user-reported consumption, although the specification shows otherwise. By specification Renault Kangoo consumes 0.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Hyundai Matrix, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Renault Kangoo could require 15 litres more fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Renault Kangoo consumes 0.7 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Hyundai Matrix. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 50 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 900 km in combined cycle | 1010 km in combined cycle | |
| 1020 km on highway | 1190 km on highway | ||
| 890 km with real consumption | 870 km with real consumption | ||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 4 years | 6 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 8 other car models, including Renault Scenic, Renault Clio, Nissan Almera, Nissan Micra, Suzuki Jimny | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Hyundai Getz, 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. Renault Kangoo 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: | 4.00 m | 4.02 m | |
| Width: | 1.66 m | 1.74 m | |
| Height: | 1.83 m | 1.64 m | |
|
Renault Kangoo is smaller, but higher. Renault Kangoo is 2 cm shorter than the Hyundai Matrix, 8 cm narrower, while the height of Renault Kangoo is 19 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 650 litres | 354 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down, if possible |
2600 litres | 1284 litres | |
|
Renault Kangoo has more luggage capacity. Even though the car is shorter, The Hyundai Matrix may have more interior space, so the cabin could be more spacious and more comfortable for the driver and passengers. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Renault Kangoo (by 1316 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.8 meters | no data | |
| Gross weight: | 1`860 kg | 1`840 kg | |
| Net weight: | 1`130 kg | 1`280 kg | |
| Load capacity: | 730 kg | 560 kg | |
| Renault Kangoo load capacity (permitted cargo and passenger weight) is par apmēram 23 procentiem more than Hyundai Matrix. Therefore, Renault Kangoo is more suitable for longer family trips or transporting heavier loads. | |||
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | low | average | |
| Hyundai Matrix has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Renault Kangoo has serious deffects in 35 percent more cases than Hyundai Matrix, so Hyundai Matrix quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 1600 | 1000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Renault Kangoo has
|
Hyundai Matrix has
| |