|
|
VS |
|
Welcome to the Ford Ecosport Vs MG ZS comparison for 2019. We’ve been comparing the MG ZS with it’s competition for a few posts now and it suddenly occurred to compare it with the virtually forgotten Ford Ecosport. The initial Ford Ecosport had packaging issues which prevented it from winning any comparison or buyers. However the Ecosport has finally been updated and is ready for a new comparison/review.
Ford Ecosport Vs MG ZS exterior comparison: The Ford Ecosport is definitely a nice looking small SUV that fits clearly in the current Ford design language. The design includes a rear wheel carrier which gives it a genuine off roader look and to ours eyes gives it additional design points. Unfortunately not all model grades have this feature. It also appears smaller than the MG ZS but there is really not much in it. The Ford SUV range is definitely better looking than it’s arch competitor the various GM or General Motors brands aka the Holden Trax, which are now cheap looking Daewoo designs. In comparison the MG ZS is a OK looking SUV clearly mimicking the Mazda CX-5 and Nissan etc.. all there other popular brands. It’s not a bad effort just too much of an overall copy to commend it’s design as original or any good.
Ford Ecosport Vs MG ZS interior comparison: The Ford Ecosport has been given convincing interior design update and certainly and upgrade. Gone is the futuristic design from the Ford Fiesta but made of cheap looking plastics and now equipped with the stereotypical tablet style screen but a little boring to look at. However the quality of materials while arguably has improved it’s not close to the class leading CH-R or the CX-3. The Ecosport is clearly more utilitarian due to the hard plastics but more interior storage with under seat storage drawer as a bonus. In comparison the MG ZS interior is nicer in terms feeling things like nicer plastics mostly soft touch but it is a dated design. Ford needs to learn how to use hard plastics to look better as per Toyota and Mazda. While the Ford design is better the feel of the MG ZS is better.
Ford Ecosport Vs MG ZS engines and and technology comparison: The Ford Ecosport has more safety systems than the MG ZS so wins this part of the comparison by default. Along with more powerful engines the Ford is well equipped including a nicer sound stereo system, DAB+ radio is a nice addition missing on the MG ZS. The Ford’s major feature is the standard auto box and also its major flaw, the auto transmission is a version of the not so reliable DSG. The MG ZS is very well equipped for the price but it is missing little things folding mirrors and puddle lighting which cost cutting on MG part but it is expected. The 4 speed auto on the base model is another example.
Ford Ecosport Vs MG ZS drive comparison: N/A
The winner of the Ford Ecosport Vs MG ZS is the Ecosport. The upgrades to the Ecosport are substantial especially the interior and the engine transmission selection. With an entry level price less than the MG ZS although will less gadgets is still a good buy. The exterior design hasn’t changed it still look current compared to it competitors and side by side looks like a more expensive model than the MG ZS. They low numbers on the road help with keeping it’s lines modern. The cheaper but flawed MG ZS is still a decent enough SUV but it’s copied looks and lower safety grade is not something we would consider parking in the driveway.
| Ford Ecosport | MG ZS |
 |
 |
| Engines | |
| 3 Cylinder Ecoboost 0.9 Litre (999cc) petrol Turbo DOHC VVT EFI Claimed 92Kw @ 6000RPM Claimed 170Nm @ 1400RPM |
3 Cylinder Petrol (95 Octane) 1.0 Litre (999cc) Turbo DOHC VVT EFI Claimed 82Kw @ 5200 RPM Claimed 160Nm @ 1800 RPM |
| IL3 Cylinder 1.5 Litre (1498cc) petrol DOHC VVT EFI Claimed 90.5Kw @ 6500RPM Claimed 150Nm @ 4500RPM |
4 Cylinder Petrol (91 Octane) 1.5 Litre (1499cc) DOHC VVT DI EFI Claimed 90Kw @ 6000 RPM Claimed 150Nm @ 4500 RPM |
| Weight | |
| Kerb weight FROM 1242 kg Towing capacity up to 700kg |
Kerb weight FROM 1255Kg Towing capacity up to 500 kg |
| Fuel capacity & consumption | |
| Up to 52 litres IL4 0.9 Petrol Turbo 6.7 litres per 100km IL4 1.5 Petrol 6.9 litres per 100km |
Up to 48 litres IL3 1.0 Turbo Petrol 6.7 litres per 100km IL4 1.5 litre Petrol 7.1 litres per 100km |
| Other specifications | |
| 6 Speed Auto Overall height/width 1664/2057 Overall length/wheelbase 4325/2519 4WD system: None ANCAP safety rating 5/5 |
4 or 6 speed Auto Overall height/width 1644/1809 Overall length/wheelbase 4314/2585 4WD system: 2WD ANCAP Safety: 4/5 |
| Capability | |
| Angle of: (degrees) Approach 24.7′ Departure 29 Breakover xx Ground clearance (unloaded) 209 mm Water Fording depth xxmm Max |
Angle of: (degrees) Approach xx Departure xx Breakover xx Ground clearance (unloaded) 220 mm Water Fording depth xxmm Max |
| Performance | |
| Pricing | |
| 2019 $22,790 – 28,990 AUD *Always check with the dealer for up to date pricing, specifications, on-road costs, accessories and specials etc.. everything as usual is subject to change! |
2018 $20,990 – 23,990 AUD |