
- Home
- Tools
- Compare cars
- Chery Tiggo 4 VS MG ZS
Chery Tiggo 4 vs MG ZS: Which Should You Buy in Egypt?
A complete comparison of the Chery Tiggo 4 VS MG ZS — specs, prices, pros and cons, and live used listings across Egypt.


MG ZS
From EGP 265,000
Chery Tiggo 4 VS MG ZS: the verdict
| #1 Chery Tiggo 4#1 | #2 MG ZS#2 | |
|---|---|---|
| Price Comparison | ||
| Starting at | — | 265,000 – 298,000 EGP |
| Engine & Power | ||
| Engine | 1,500 cc · 4 cyl | 1,498 cc · 4 cyl |
| Horsepower (bhp) | 145 hp | 112 hp |
| Torque (Nm) | 210 Nm | 150 Nm |
| Acceleration 0-100 Km/h (sec) | 9.6 – 11 s | 10.9 s |
| Top Speed (Km/h) | 180 – 200 km/h | 170 km/h |
| Fuel Economy (L/100 Km) | 5.7 – 7.4 L/100km | 5.8 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 57 L | 48 L |
| Gears | 6 | 4 |
| Transmission | Automatic | Automatic |
| Drive Type | Front Wheel Drive | Front Wheel Drive |
| Fuel Type | Petrol | Petrol |
| Measurements | ||
| L×W×H | 4.3 m × 1.8 m × 1.6 m | 4.3 m × 1.8 m × 1.6 m |
| Wheelbase (meters) | 2.6 m | 2.6 m |
| Curb Weight (kg) | 1,405 kg | 1,258 kg |
| Trunk Capacity (liters) | 340 L | 448 L |
| Overview | ||
| Body Style | SUV Crossover | SUV Crossover |
| Seating Capacity | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Doors | 5 doors | 5 doors |
| Features | ||
| Key features | ABS (Anti-lock Brake System)AirbagsAnti theft alarmAUXBA (Brake Assist)BluetoothCD PlayerCenter Arm RestCentral LockingEBD (Electronic Brakeforce Distribution)Fabric SeatsFog Lamps - Front OnlyFoldable Rear Seats with 60:40 SplitHill AssistImmobilizerISOFIX Child Seat AnchorsKeyless EntryMP3Multi-Information DisplayPower SteeringPower Windows - Front and RearRadioRear LampsSeat Adjustment - ManualTraction ControlTyre Pressure Monitoring DisplayUSB PortVariable Cylinder Management (VCM)Wheel SizeWheels - Alloy | 12V SocketABS (Anti-lock Brake System)AirbagsAudio Controls on Steering WheelAutomatic ACBA (Brake Assist)BluetoothCargo Area LightCenter Arm RestCentral LockingCruise ControlCruise Control Switch on SteeringCupholdersDaytime Running LightsDrive ComputerEBD (Electronic Brakeforce Distribution)Electric Door MirrorsFabric SeatsFog Lamp - Front and RearFog Lamp - Rear OnlyFoldable Rear Seats with 60:40 SplitFront Seat ArmrestHalogen HeadlampsHigh Mount Stop LampHill AssistImmobilizerISOFIX Child Seat AnchorsKeyless EntryLeather Gear Shift LeverLeather SeatsLeather Steering WheelManual ACMap Reading LampsMP3Multi-Information DisplayNumber of SpeakersOdometerParking SensorsPower OutletsPower SteeringPower Windows - Front and RearPush Button StartRadioRear CameraRear CupholdersRear Window DefoggerRear WiperRoof RailsRoof SpoilerSeat Adjustment - ManualSeatbelt pretensionerSteering Tilt AdjustmentTemperature DisplayTouchscreenTouchscreen SizeTraction ControlTrip ComputerTrip MeterTyre Pressure Monitoring DisplayUSB PortVanity MirrorVehicle Stability Control (VSC)Welcome LightWheel SizeWheels - Alloy |
Which one should you buy?
Best for Performance Enthusiasts
The Chery Tiggo 4 clearly outpaces the MG ZS with its 145 hp engine and 210 Nm of torque, delivering a more engaging drive and quicker acceleration.
Best for Cargo Space
Families or shoppers needing ample storage will find the MG ZS more accommodating, boasting a generous 448 liters of trunk capacity compared to the Tiggo 4's 340 liters.
Best for Budget Clarity
The MG ZS provides clear pricing from 265,000 EGP, offering peace of mind for buyers on a strict budget, while the Chery Tiggo 4's pricing is currently unavailable.
Best for Highway Driving
With 6 gears and a higher top speed of 200 km/h, the Chery Tiggo 4 offers a smoother and more relaxed highway experience, making it suitable for longer journeys.
Pros & cons
Chery Tiggo 4
Pros
- Higher horsepower (145 hp)
- More torque (210 Nm)
- Quicker acceleration (9.6 seconds)
- Higher top speed (200 km/h)
- More gears (6 gears)
Cons
- Smaller trunk capacity (340 L)
- Price information unavailable
- Heavier kerb weight (1,405 kg)
- Potentially higher fuel consumption (up to 7.4 L/100km)
MG ZS
Pros
- Larger trunk capacity (448 L)
- Clear and competitive pricing
- Lighter kerb weight (1,258 kg)
- Better consistent fuel economy (5.8 L/100km)
Cons
- Lower horsepower (112 hp)
- Less torque (150 Nm)
- Slower acceleration (10.9 seconds)
- Fewer gears (4 gears)




