DETAILED CAR COMPARISON

2003 MG ZR vs 2003 MG ZT Comparison

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

VS
WINNER

MG ZR

Leads the overall E-Kıyasla score by 0.75 points.

60.25–59.5
SPECIFICATION GROUPS

Every difference between the two cars

Basic Specifications

MG ZRSpecificationMG ZT
MGMakeMG
ZRModelZT
2003Model year2003
HatchbackBody typeSedan
5Seats5
3/5Doors4

Performance

MG ZRSpecificationMG ZT
10,0 s0–100 km/h11,3 s
185 km/hTop speed193 km/h
1994 ccEngine displacement1951 cc
113 HPPower131 HP
260 NmTorque300 Nm
4Cylinders4

Fuel & Consumption

MG ZRSpecificationMG ZT
DieselFuel typeDiesel
50 ltFuel tank65 lt
7,7 ltUrban consumption8,1 lt
4,2 ltExtra-urban consumption4,4 lt
5,6 ltAverage consumption5,8 lt

Transmission & Chassis

MG ZRSpecificationMG ZT
Front-wheel driveDrivetrainFront-wheel drive
5Gears5
205/50 R16Tyre size225/45 R18
YesABSYes

Dimensions

MG ZRSpecificationMG ZT
4011 mmLength4740 mm
1690 mmWidth1780 mm
1400 mmHeight1410 mm
1155 KgWeight1535 Kg
2502 mmWheelbase2746 mm

E-Kıyasla Editor’s Note

2003 MG ZR and 2003 MG ZT 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, MG ZR 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…