DETAILED CAR COMPARISON

2003 MG ZR vs 2003 Rover 75 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 ZRSpecificationRover 75
MGMakeRover
ZRModel75
2003Model year2003
HatchbackBody typeSedan
5Seats5
3/5Doors4

Performance

MG ZRSpecificationRover 75
10,0 s0–100 km/h10,3 s
185 km/hTop speed193 km/h
1994 ccEngine displacement1951 cc
113 HPPower131 HP
260 NmTorque300 Nm
4Cylinders4

Fuel & Consumption

MG ZRSpecificationRover 75
DieselFuel typeDiesel
50 ltFuel tank65 lt
7,7 ltUrban consumption8,1 lt
4,2 ltExtra-urban consumption4,4 lt
5,6 ltAverage consumption—

Transmission & Chassis

MG ZRSpecificationRover 75
Front-wheel driveDrivetrainFront-wheel drive
5Gears5
205/50 R16Tyre size195/65 R15
YesABSYes

Dimensions

MG ZRSpecificationRover 75
4011 mmLength4747 mm
1690 mmWidth1778 mm
1400 mmHeight1424 mm
1155 KgWeight1510 Kg
2502 mmWheelbase2746 mm

E-Kıyasla Editor’s Note

2003 MG ZR and 2003 Rover 75 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…