Jeep Compass 2016 Sport 2.4L vs MG ZS 2020 1.3T ZST Comparison

Car Information

/

8.0

/

Engine / Motor

183

185

4

3

Dimensions

5 Seater

5 Seater

4448

4.314

1512

1.809

1718

1.624

2635

2.585

643

448

Fuel Economy

9.9

17.2

51

48

Comfort

/

/

/

/

/

/

Interior

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

Safety

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

Infotainment

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

Transmission

Automatic

CVT

/

Chassis & Steering

All Wheel Drive

Front Wheel Drive

/

/

Wheels/brakes

/

/

/

Key Spec

2.4 L

1.3 L - 1.5 L

172 BHP - 180 BHP

112 BHP - 168

Automatic

6AT & Automatic & CVT

Gasoline & Petrol

Gasoline & Petrol

TBD

TBD

5 Seater

5 Seater

Exterior

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

Engine

2.4 L

1.3 L

Gasoline

Petrol

172 BHP

160 BHP

220

230

Technologies

/

/

/

/

/

Comparison of configuration highlights

  • Jeep Compass 2016 Sport 2.4L

    • Audio Controls on Steering Wheel
    • Electronic Engine Immobilizer
    • Rear Defogger
    • Keyless Entry
    • Seats - Comfort
    • Steering Adjustment
    • Anti-Theft Alarm System
    • Rollover stability control
    • EBD (Electronic Brakeforce Distribution)
    • ABS
    • Child Seat Interface (ISOFIX)
    • Active braking
  • MG ZS 2020 1.3T ZST

    • Audio Controls on Steering Wheel
    • Electronic Engine Immobilizer
    • Power Tailgate
    • Rear Defogger
    • Push Button Start
    • Temperature Display
    • Keyless Entry
    • Welcome Light
    • Rear Camera
    • Steering Adjustment
    • Anti-Theft Alarm System
    • Number of Airbags
    • Pedestrian airbag
    • Fire Extinguisher
    • Active Bonnet
    • Collision Detection
    • Auto Door Lock
    • Spare Wheel
    • Door Mirrors with Side Turn Signal
    • Vehicle Stability Control (VSC)
    • Parking Sensors - Front and Rear
    • EBD (Electronic Brakeforce Distribution)
    • ABS
    • Traction Control System (TCS / ASR, etc.)
    • Child Seat Interface (ISOFIX)
    • Active braking

Review Comparison

Positive

  • Attractive and modern exterior design
  • High off-road driving ability
  • Advanced security features

Negative

  • Higher fuel consumption compared to competitors
  • Luggage space is limited
  • Medium performance acceleration capability

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

Related comparisons

Editor's PickJeep Compass 2016 Sport 2.4L

Expert / Editor Recommendation

Choose Jeep Compass 2016 Sport 2.4L if you care more about price; choose MG ZS 2020 1.3T ZST if you care more about fuel economy.

Popular Car Comparisons

Jeep | Jeep Compass 2016 Sport 2.4L

VS

Haval | H2 1.5T Intelligent

Jeep | Jeep Compass 2016 Sport 2.4L

VS

Hongqi | EHS3 EV 153 hp (FWD)

Jeep | Jeep Compass 2016 Sport 2.4L

VS

Hongqi | EHS3 EV 305 hp (AWD)

Jeep | Jeep Compass 2016 Sport 2.4L

VS

Sandstorm | Alreem 2.0T High Line (4x4)

Jeep | Jeep Compass 2016 Sport 2.4L

VS

Geely | GS Sport 1.8L Classic

Q&A

  • According to fuel consumption data, Jeep Compass 2016 Sport 2.4L has a fuel consumption of 10.1, while MG ZS 2020 1.3T ZST has a fuel consumption of 5.81. Therefore, MG ZS 2020 1.3T ZST is more fuel-efficient.
  • In terms of interior space, Jeep Compass 2016 Sport 2.4L has a wheelbase of 2635, while MG ZS 2020 1.3T ZST has a wheelbase of 2.585. Generally, the model with the longer wheelbase, Jeep Compass 2016 Sport 2.4L, offers more room.
  • Check drive type, ground clearance and torque together. Jeep Compass 2016 Sport 2.4L uses All Wheel Drive, while MG ZS 2020 1.3T ZST uses Front Wheel Drive.