ZS 1.5L STD vs MG HS 2023 2.0T Luxury (AWD) Comparison
Review Comparison
Positive
- Modern and attractive exterior design
- Economical fuel consumption
- Competitive price compared to specifications
Negative
- Average interior material quality
- Engine performance is limited by power
- The lack of some advanced security systems
Positive
- No data found
Negative
- No data found
Price Comparison
OMR 5868
OMR 10320
OMR 5639
OMR 9900
OMR 79
OMR 139
Fuel Consumption Comparison
0.06 L/KM
0.08 L/KM
Daily Fule Payment
OMR 0.99
Daily Fule Payment
OMR 1.32
Weekly Fule Payment
OMR 6.93
Weekly Fule Payment
OMR 9.24
Monthly Fule Payment
OMR 29.7
Monthly Fule Payment
OMR 39.6
Yearly Fule Payment
OMR 361.35
Yearly Fule Payment
OMR 481.8
Hide common specs
Car Information
Engine / Motor
170
210
/
4
Dimensions
5 Seater
5 Seater
1318
/
17
/
5
/
4323
4574
1809
1876
1653
1685
2585
2720
359/1166
463
145
/
Fuel Economy
17.2
12.2
45
55
Comfort
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
✓
Smart Key
/
Manual
/
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
Interior
✓
/
Front Row Seats
/
Fabric
/
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
/
✓
✓
✓
/
✓
/
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
Safety
Drivers and Passenger Airbag
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
Infotainment
10.1
/
✓
✓
✓
/
4
/
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
Transmission
CVT
Automatic
/
✓
Chassis & Steering
Front Drive
All Wheel Drive
McPherson Front Shock Absorber
/
H Torsional Beam
/
Wheels/brakes
Disc
/
Disc
/
215/55 R17
/
215/55 R17
/
Exterior
✓
✓
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
✓
LED
/
✓
/
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
/
✓
Engine
1.5 L
2.0 L
Gasoline
Gasoline
118 BHP
231 BHP
88
/
180
360
Technologies
✓
/
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
/
✓
✓
✓
/
/
✓
/
✓
