When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
Awesome thank you so much for the info also does that mean you can get a base model with awd then?
According to the I specs I saw, only the mid-line S model, with the standard engine, came with AWD as an option. They didn't offer it in the top-line XRS version.
It was more than a badge as i believe it was at one point a jointly owned factory
When GM went broke and a killing off Pontiac, these cars were very cheap to buy
The GM version of the Matrix, the Pontiac Vibe, was built at the New United Motor Manufacturing, Inc. (NUMMI) plant in Fremont, California. NUMMI was a GM and Toyota joint venture set up in 1984. GM used it to learn about lean manufacturing from Toyota and Toyota used it to learn about working with American workers.
This is the plant that GM abandoned in its bankruptcy in 2009. Toyota subsequently sold it to Tesla.
The Pontiac Vibe and Toyota Matrix were jointly developed by GM and Toyota for North America. As I understand it, Pontiac wanted a small crossover SUV model and the 1st-generation Vibe came with black plastic cladding on the lower bumpers, around the wheelwells and along the rocker panels, which are now crossover utility vehicle styling cues. The Vibe was also produced in a right-hand drive model and exported to Japan as the Toyota Voltz; it did not sell well in Japan, however.
According to the I specs I saw, only the mid-line S model, with the standard engine, came with AWD as an option. They didn't offer it in the top-line XRS version.
Awesome that's exactly what I wanted to know I am really excited to see all the positive stuff being said about these cars it is either between the matrix or a rav4 what ever I can get cheaper but all the positive stuff being said about the matrix is making me lean toward them.
I almost bought a 1st gen Matrix XRS back in 2011 or so. Hell of a fun car to drive, drove like a normal slow economy car unless you revved it hard past 4000rpm or so, then it kicked on the afterburners, the engine made a nice growl, shift it hard at redline, it was a lot of fun. Also a lot of fun in the turns, didn't have a lot of ultimate grip, but the steering was very quick, direct and had great feel to it. It was about 8/10ths of that fun early 2000's Celica GTS in terms of how it drove, but in a more practical wagon body style, and you did sit up a bit higher.
I almost bought a 1st gen Matrix XRS back in 2011 or so. Hell of a fun car to drive, drove like a normal slow economy car unless you revved it hard past 4000rpm or so, then it kicked on the afterburners, the engine made a nice growl, shift it hard at redline, it was a lot of fun. Also a lot of fun in the turns, didn't have a lot of ultimate grip, but the steering was very quick, direct and had great feel to it. It was about 8/10ths of that fun early 2000's Celica GTS in terms of how it drove, but in a more practical wagon body style, and you did sit up a bit higher.
The Matrix XRS and Celica GTS had the same engine and drivetrain....the high revving 1.8L VVTi-four. The typical characteristics of that power plant (as with similar Honda VTEC fours) were pretty much as you described....sluggish at low RPM, with a very sharp torque curve, then most of the power coming on just short of redline. Kids used to drag-race them.....I saw more than one of those engines, in the Toyota service bay, being repaired or replaced because some kid had gotten carried away and overdid it in the rev-department.
The Matrix XRS and Celica GTS had the same engine and drivetrain....the high revving 1.8L VVTi-four. The typical characteristics of that power plant (as with similar Honda VTEC fours) were pretty much as you described....sluggish at low RPM, with a very sharp torque curve, then most of the power coming on just short of redline. Kids used to drag-race them.....I saw more than one of those engines, in the Toyota service bay, being repaired or replaced because some kid had gotten carried away and overdid it in the rev-department.
2nd Gen Matrix XRS did NOT have the 1.8L engine. It maintained the same, newer 2.4L inline 4 that the S trims had. The XRS in the 2nd gen did get an independent rear suspension, which the lower FWD trims did not have. The AWD's did share the independent rear suspension.
2nd Gen Matrix XRS did NOT have the 1.8L engine. It maintained the same, newer 2.4L inline 4 that the S trims had. The XRS in the 2nd gen did get an independent rear suspension, which the lower FWD trims did not have. The AWD's did share the independent rear suspension.
When the XRS first debuted, it had the same DOHC 1.8L VTEC engine as the Celica GT. That was the version I was referring to. Yes, the 2Gen made some changes.
The styling of the 2nd generation Matrix was kind of "blobby" at best. The 1st generation still looks pretty good for a small wagon. I test drove one of those and was impressed with its smoothness and interior quality (IIRC it had like 280K km). The dash was a little creaky and cheap though, with the silvery trim piece shifting around when you moved the air control selection dial. But a really solid car and the engine bay was dry as a bone.
Originally Posted by 05ls43518
Awesome that's exactly what I wanted to know I am really excited to see all the positive stuff being said about these cars it is either between the matrix or a rav4 what ever I can get cheaper but all the positive stuff being said about the matrix is making me lean toward them.
If you're okay with the 2nd generation styling, that's probably the one to get. 2.4 liter engine, automatic and AWD. RAV4 is a great choice but it might go for more money as they so popular.
When the XRS first debuted, it had the same DOHC 1.8L VTEC engine as the Celica GT. That was the version I was referring to. Yes, the 2Gen made some changes.
I never knew that the Matrix had a Honda engine? That would explain why they were gutless, "until VTEC kicked in".
I think you mean the 1.8-litre VVTL-i (Variable Valve Timing and Lift with intelligent control system) 2ZZ-GE (Toyota) engine.
I never knew that the Matrix had a Honda engine? That would explain why they were gutless, "until VTEC kicked in".
I think you mean the 1.8-litre VVTL-i (Variable Valve Timing and Lift with intelligent control system) 2ZZ-GE (Toyota) engine.
Call it what you want....there were several different abbreviations and terms to describe the variable-valve-timing process. What I meant (and I figured that you, as an engineer, would know this), is that the 1.8L DOHC veritable-valve timing engine used in the early-2000s Celica GT and 1Gen Matrix XRS was quite similar to the VTEC Honda fours of the period. They had double-overhead cams, secondary valve timing actuation on the cams that kicked in at higher RPMs, a very pronounced torque-curve (wasn't much at all down low, like with Mazda's rotary), and were famous for being pedal-to-the-metal engines if you wanted any real spunk. The 1Gen Honda S2000 was probably the best example of all (9000 RPM redline, HP peak at 8600, torque-perk at 7600)....but the Toyota 1.8L VVT-i and later versions of the S2000 were almost as peaky in the torque curve. Some kids still got carried away with the RPMs, though, even with these motorcycle-like limits.....I saw more than one of these engines in the service bay being repaired or replaced from abuse.
The styling of the 2nd generation Matrix was kind of "blobby" at best. The 1st generation still looks pretty good for a small wagon. I test drove one of those and was impressed with its smoothness and interior quality (IIRC it had like 280K km). The dash was a little creaky and cheap though, with the silvery trim piece shifting around when you moved the air control selection dial. But a really solid car and the engine bay was dry as a bone.
If you're okay with the 2nd generation styling, that's probably the one to get. 2.4 liter engine, automatic and AWD. RAV4 is a great choice but it might go for more money as they so popular.
The 2.4 we have is pretty poor on gas mileage. I imagine it would be even worse in AWD.
The 2.4 we have is pretty poor on gas mileage. I imagine it would be even worse in AWD.
Probably a trade off in practicality. Between a Jeep Cherokee and its atrocious gas mileage and the LS430 that the OP is driving, the 2.4's smooth and tractable daily stop and go usability is a better option. Plus there's the wagon and AWD usefulness. Flip those rear seats down and you have a pretty practical space for daily use.
The 2.4 we have is pretty poor on gas mileage. I imagine it would be even worse in AWD.
My AWD Outback, with a N/A 2.5L, was (probably) about the same power rating as your 2.4L. With AWD, it got 30-31 on the road and, in general, about 17-20 in town....add about 1-2 MPG to that with the A/C off. The Matrix, though, is probably a little lighter than the slightly larger Outback....that might also help a little with MPG.
I owe a 2003 Pontiac Vibe GT aka 03 Toyota Matrix XR-S with the VVTL-i engine.
This car has been pretty reliable and is very fun to drive! 6200 RPM and the second cam kicks in an that is where the fun begins all the way up to 8k + rpms. I would stay away from the regular counter part (NON GT or XR-S models) as they have the same oil burning problems as the Corollas 02-06. Trust me on that! There were some issues with the 01-02 VVTL-i engines as there was a flaw with the tranny in which drivers would miss shift causing the engine to over rev and blow. It was NEVER an engine problem as the miss shift caused the issue. This was addressed 03 and up. The second gen 07 and up had an engine change 2.5L which are gas hogs and not as reliable.
Here are a few pics of my Vibe GT.
12-16-17, 05:03 PM
That would explain why they were gutless, "until VTEC kicked in".
