Honda
Fit
Toyota
Matrix
Honda Fit vs Toyota Matrix: 2009 Comparison
Specs side by side
What owners say
Fit
Overall
Overwhelmingly positive sentiment centered on exceptional practicality, reliability, and low cost of ownership. The vehicle is consistently praised for its "magic seat" interior configuration, offering surprising cargo space and passenger room that rivals larger vehicles, all within a compact, easy-to-park footprint. Owners report high satisfaction with fuel economy (real-world reports of 36 MPG highway), simple and inexpensive maintenance, and a fun, tossable driving character, particularly with the manual transmission.
Best version to buy
Second Generation (late model, ~2009-2014): Specifically cited for its traditional Multi-Point Injection (MPI) engine and conventional automatic transmission ("Hondamatic"), which owners associate with extreme long-term reliability and simpler, cheaper maintenance. This generation is highlighted as having a drivetrain capable of lasting "half a million miles." The manual transmission variant (6-speed) is highly recommended across all generations for driving enjoyment and perceived durability.
Known issues
- ⚠CVT transmission concerns: Potential long-term reliability questions, especially if fluid service intervals are neglected; some reports of a "weird" feel compared to conventional automatics. Frequency: recurrent.
- ⚠Direct Injection (GDI) engine carbon buildup: Mentioned as a known issue for third-generation (2015+) models with Gasoline Direct Injection, requiring potential cleaning. Frequency: isolated.
- ⚠Firm/uncomfortable ride quality: Noted as harsh over bumps and potholes, with inadequate damping. Frequency: recurrent.
Matrix
Overall
Overwhelmingly positive sentiment regarding long-term reliability, practicality, and value for money. The vehicle is consistently praised as an extremely durable and economical choice, with numerous reports of reaching 200,000 miles (322,000 km) and beyond with only routine maintenance. Owners highlight the versatile, flat-folding cargo space as a major strength, enabling the transport of large items, furniture, and pets.
Best version to buy
Models equipped with the 1.8L engine (either 1ZZ-FE or 2ZR-FE) are strongly preferred over those with the 2.4L engine due to the latter's known oil consumption issues. For the second generation (2009+), a 2010 or newer model is often cited as preferable, with some feedback indicating these later years had fewer issues.
Known issues
- ⚠Excessive oil consumption (2.4L engine): Engine burns a significant amount of oil, potentially requiring a litre every 1,000 miles (1,600 km); a known, severe issue specific to the 2009 2.4L. Frequency: very frequent.
- ⚠Rust corrosion: Particularly in rear wheel arches, rocker panels, and around the rear subframe mounting points; can become structural and lead to vehicle being unsafe or scrapped, especially in Canada and northern US states.
- ⚠Rear differential failure (AWD models): Complete failure requiring very costly replacement (quoted at $5,000 CAD / ~$3,700 USD), reported on high-mileage examples. Frequency: isolated.
Explore further
Not sure which one fits you?
Answer a few questions and get a personalized recommendation.
Frequently asked questions
Which is more reliable, the Honda Fit or the Toyota Matrix?
Owner reports show similar reliability sentiment for the Honda Fit and the Toyota Matrix. Check the known issues listed above for specific differences between the two.
Which is better for families, the Honda Fit or the Toyota Matrix?
Data on family-specific factors like cargo space is limited for one or both models, but based on available reports, both are positioned as practical daily drivers. Check the specs table above for seating and body type.
Which has better fuel economy, the Honda Fit or the Toyota Matrix?
Fuel consumption data is limited for one or both models. Check the specs table above for the figures available on each catalogued version.
Which is cheaper to maintain, the Honda Fit or the Toyota Matrix?
Exact maintenance costs aren't in our data, but reliability signals above are the closest proxy: fewer reported issues generally means lower repair costs over time.