
- 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 750,000
Chery Tiggo 4 VS MG ZS: the verdict
| #1 Chery Tiggo 4#1 | #2 MG ZS#2 | |
|---|---|---|
| Price Comparison | ||
| Starting at | — | 750,000 – 810,000 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 s | 10.9 s |
| Top Speed (Km/h) | 191 – 200 km/h | 170 km/h |
| Fuel Economy (L/100 Km) | 5.7 – 6.8 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 Driving Enthusiasts
The Chery Tiggo 4, with its 145 hp engine and quicker 0-100 km/h acceleration in 9.6 seconds, offers a more dynamic and responsive driving experience compared to the MG ZS.
Best for Cargo Space
The MG ZS is the clear winner for practicality, with a generous 448 L trunk capacity that easily surpasses the Tiggo 4's 340 L, making it ideal for large shopping trips or family travel.
Best for Longer Journeys
The Chery Tiggo 4's larger 57 L fuel tank provides extended range between fill-ups, offering greater convenience on long drives than the MG ZS's 48 L tank.
Best for Everyday Commuting
The MG ZS offers a comfortable ride and its lighter kerb weight (1,258 kg) makes it nimble for city driving, providing a practical choice for daily commutes.
Pros & cons
Chery Tiggo 4
Pros
- Higher engine power (145 hp)
- Stronger torque (210 Nm)
- Faster acceleration (9.6s)
- More gears (6-speed automatic)
- Larger fuel tank (57 L)
Cons
- Smaller boot capacity (340 L)
- Heavier kerb weight (1,405 kg)
- Price information unavailable in Egypt
MG ZS
Pros
- Larger boot capacity (448 L)
- Lighter kerb weight (1,258 kg)
- Known price range in Egypt
Cons
- Less powerful engine and torque (112 hp / 150 Nm)
- Slower acceleration (10.9s)
- Fewer gears (4-speed automatic)
- Smaller fuel tank (48 L)




