DETAILED CAR COMPARISON

2004 MG ZR vs 2004 Kia Optima Comparison

Compare technical specifications, scores and everyday-use differences side by side.

VS
WINNER

Kia Optima

Leads the overall E-Kıyasla score by 0.75 points.

62.5–63.25
SPECIFICATION GROUPS

Every difference between the two cars

Basic Specifications

MG ZRSpecificationKia Optima
MGMakeKia
ZRModelOptima
2004Model year2004
HatchbackBody typeSedan
5Seats5
3/5Doors4

Performance

MG ZRSpecificationKia Optima
7,8 s0–100 km/h—
210 km/hTop speed199 km/h
1796 ccEngine displacement1836 cc
160 HPPower134 HP
174 NmTorque169 Nm
4Cylinders4

Fuel & Consumption

MG ZRSpecificationKia Optima
PetrolFuel typePetrol
50 ltFuel tank65 lt
10,4 ltUrban consumption—
5,8 ltExtra-urban consumption—
7,5 ltAverage consumption—

Transmission & Chassis

MG ZRSpecificationKia Optima
Front-wheel driveDrivetrainFront-wheel drive
5Gears5
205/50 R15Tyre size195/70 R14
YesABSYes

Dimensions

MG ZRSpecificationKia Optima
4011 mmLength4745 mm
1690 mmWidth1815 mm
1400 mmHeight1420 mm
1090 KgWeight1390 Kg
2502 mmWheelbase2700 mm

E-Kıyasla Editor’s Note

2004 MG ZR and 2004 Kia Optima approach the same decision from different angles. We compare the exact versions so changes in engine, transmission, dimensions and equipment are not hidden behind the model names.

Overall, Kia Optima leads the E-Kıyasla score by 0.75 points. The score provides a consistent summary, while the best choice can still change with priorities such as urban efficiency, luggage space, performance or equipment.

SIMILAR COMPARISONS

Similar comparisons

Explore related comparisons featuring cars from this matchup.

Comments are loading…