Model Year | 2006 | 2017 | |
Model | Toyota Matrix | ||
Engine | |||
Transmission | |||
Drivetrain | |||
Body | |||
Difference | |||
Total Legroom | 0 in (over 1 rows) | 0 in (over 1 rows) | 0 in |
2006 Toyota Matrix Seat Room and Comfort: Pros | ||
Year | Body/Powertrain | Comment |
2007 | 4dr Hatch 126-horsepower 1.8L I4 4-speed automatic FWD |
a lot of place, even for tall people. see full Toyota Matrix review |
2005 | 4dr Hatch 130-horsepower 1.8L I4 4-speed automatic FWD |
Lots of room in rear seats while both front seats are being used, enough room for 5 adults. see full Toyota Matrix review |
2006 Toyota Matrix Seat Room and Comfort: Cons | ||
Year | Body/Powertrain | Comment |
2007 | 4dr Hatch 126-horsepower 1.8L I4 4-speed automatic FWD |
very uncomfortable and not ergonomic at all. especially with child sits. see full Toyota Matrix review |
2007 | 4dr Hatch 126-horsepower 1.8L I4 4-speed automatic FWD |
Were flat and didnt grip you well see full Toyota Matrix review |
2017 Seat Room and Comfort: Cons | ||
Year | Comment | |
Hyundai packaged the Kona fairly efficiently, but only so much was possible given the crossover's compact exterior dimensions. At 5-9 I can barely sit behind someone else my height, my knees nearly touching the front seat back. Put taller people in the front seats, and the rear seat would become viable only for small adults and children. The Honda HR-V has a much roomier rear seat (but much less comfortable front seats, at least for me, as their headrests jut too far forward). Most other competitors fall between the two. One exception: the Mazda CX-3 has an even tighter rear seat than the Kona. For those who fit, the Kona's rear seat is mounted comfortably high off the floor. see full review |
None of our members have yet commented on the seat room and comfort of the 2017 .