Cons
- Lacklustre handling
- Low on quality
- Questionable safety record
- Not that I like all of the "new" MGs, but 0 engine problems in the updated 1.8 k series, yes 0... 0 problems in the 1.5 4 cyl and the 1.5 turbo 4 cyl...
- That does not speak of low quality. They are selling millions of these cars in the far east.
- Lacklustre handling.. i have had a couple of days driving two different zs and the handling is fine if you don't need a sports car. For heavens sake it's not a Po-face jag (sorry mean f pace)
- Questionable safety record.. what is the reviewer on? they want 5***** from a £12k car. I want something without all the braking assistance, lane departure etc, as less to go wrong.
Edited by oldroverboy. on 29/08/2018 at 20:59
|
|
Firstly, the review you speak of is 6 months old so not sure why you are bringing it up now?
Secondly, MG is a sporty brand, there is no getting away from that. SAIC resurrected the brand knowing this, so they really should be making sure the cars handle as such. If they want to have a softer and less sporty handling car then they should bring back the Austin name and market it under that.
When they talk of low quality i think it is fairly safe to assume they are talking about the interior plastics as opposed to reliability. Now i have mentioned before that in my own opinion, far too much kudos is given over to the quality of the interior plastics, but i realise i am in the minority, for most folk, this kind of stuff, i.e, showroom appeal, is what gets bums on seat's.
Regarding safety, Autotrader did not crash test this car, Euroncap did, Autotrader's comments are based on the results, just as they would be for any other car. Criticising Autotrader for pointing out the ZS's below par results is pointless. It is a well known fact now that these new 'active' crash avoidance safety measures will have an impact on the Euroncap scores. And frankly, using the excuse that the car costs (only) £12k is a non starter given that the much cheaper Dacia Sandero performs better for adult protection, much better for child protection, and much better for safety assist. In fact they only category the ZS better's the Sandero is pedestrian safety, and even then by only 2% (59% vs 57%). If you are willing to overlook this stuff, well that is your choice, but don't shoot the messenger!.
If you like the MG go ahead and buy one, i won't be knocking you for it. But i fail to see the point of this post?
|
|
Nothing MG about it. If they're going to use the moniker ZS make the car something like the ZS was.
|
Nothing MG about it. If they're going to use the moniker ZS make the car something like the ZS was.
What.. a modified Austin?????
My point is that there is lots of good points and some bad points too, but don't just dwell on the bad.
Remember how we smiled at Honda/Toyota etc in the beginning?
I might get one, I might get a duster, (same price. i might get something else, but £8000 more for a sportage is taking the Michel..
|
..but £8000 more for a sportage is taking the Michel..
The direct comparison would be the Kia Stonic, I believe.
|
..but £8000 more for a sportage is taking the Michel..
The direct comparison would be the Kia Stonic, I believe.
Stonic/Kona lot smaller inside. boot space worse. £4000 more for same spec. and more for sarnav.
Edited by oldroverboy. on 30/08/2018 at 10:53
|
|
Yes but Kia have put the work in, MG (under SAIC) haven't. Kia started off as a budget brand and slowly built up their reputation over a long period of time. Some years ago they managed to poach an Audi designer to make the cars look more desirable and contemporary, the interior quality is at least as good as the mainstream opposition, if not quite at VW levels. You may not feel the Sportage is worth £8k more than a ZS, but plenty of people do, just look at the amount of them on the road.
Whether or not Hyundai/Kia should have abandoned the budget market which got them established in the UK market is a different question. But ultimately, the Sportage is no more a ZS rival than a VW Tiguan.
Each to their own of course, but personally I'd sooner have a Duster than a ZS. It may not be the last word in quality and refinement (though I believe the new model has been improved to that end), but it is cheap, it's honest, and it's not pretending to be something it isn't.
|
Yes but Kia have put the work in, MG (under SAIC) haven't. Kia started off as a budget brand and slowly built up their reputation over a long period of time. Some years ago they managed to poach an Audi designer to make the cars look more desirable and contemporary, the interior quality is at least as good as the mainstream opposition, if not quite at VW levels. You may not feel the Sportage is worth £8k more than a ZS, but plenty of people do, just look at the amount of them on the road.
Whether or not Hyundai/Kia should have abandoned the budget market which got them established in the UK market is a different question. But ultimately, the Sportage is no more a ZS rival than a VW Tiguan.
Each to their own of course, but personally I'd sooner have a Duster than a ZS. It may not be the last word in quality and refinement (though I believe the new model has been improved to that end), but it is cheap, it's honest, and it's not pretending to be something it isn't.
Agree with you, but, I think MG will get there... Personally ( and it is Personally) The chinese (geely) are doing well with volvo, there is lynk &co... and others lurking. I think the MG UK marketing types may have overegged the pudding, shall we say.
Duster with aircon (a must) is cheaper, and yes I like the looks.
|
|
|
|
.
Stonic/Kona lot smaller inside. boot space worse. £4000 more for same spec. and more for sarnav.
If bootspace is high on your priorities then the Citroën C3 Aircross is worth a look
|
|
|
..but £8000 more for a sportage is taking the Michel..
The direct comparison would be the Kia Stonic, I believe.
Stonic/Kona lot smaller inside. boot space worse. £4000 more for same spec. and more for sarnav.
The wheelbase of the Kia Stonic is only 5mm less than that of the MG ZS, so while it may have a boot capacity 100 litres less, I doubt the interior is that much smaller.
But sizing is another area where MG confuses me. Why are both their SUV's about the same size?, it seems that they have pitched them against each other, which is a bit odd. With Kia, like most makers, you have different sizes of SUV aimed at people with different needs. If you want a big Kia SUV you get the Sorrento, medium you get the Sportage and if you want a small one you get the Stonic.
Who is the MG ZS aimed at in relation to the GS?.
|
|
|
|
|
My point is that there is lots of good points and some bad points too, but don't just dwell on the bad.
Too many bad are worth dwelling on. If you do take the plunge I'm sure you won't buy a new one, unless you get a HEFTY discount.
|
My point is that there is lots of good points and some bad points too, but don't just dwell on the bad.
Too many bad are worth dwelling on. If you do take the plunge I'm sure you won't buy a new one, unless you get a HEFTY discount.
Hefty discount on offer...2900 off demo car 2 months old...excite model aware of pitfalls, but also like 1.5 engine 4 cyl non aspirated...
cogitating....
|
|
Probably about the same size as the Honda HR-V (same size engine too) but half the price. Not in the same quality league, but certainly not half as good. A lot of cars in that size bracket are WAY over-priced (including the HR-V), such as the Mazda CX-3 and VAG equivalents (compared to the 'normal' cars they are based on or near to size-wise).
|
|
Regards Hyundai - Sorry this may be an unpopular viewpoint but I drove a hired 2018 Tucson for a week. Only a couple of thousand miles on the clock.
Not impressed at all. The interior did not seem to me to be any better than my Vitara and in some respects not as good. Performance, Economy and Road holding again inferior to the Vitara S. In fact IMO the only thing going for it was that the seats were comfy and it was a nice colour. Is the Sportage that much different then? Haven't driven the MG yet.
|
Regards Hyundai - Sorry this may be an unpopular viewpoint but I drove a hired 2018 Tucson for a week. Only a couple of thousand miles on the clock.
Not impressed at all. The interior did not seem to me to be any better than my Vitara and in some respects not as good. Performance, Economy and Road holding again inferior to the Vitara S. In fact IMO the only thing going for it was that the seats were comfy and it was a nice colour. Is the Sportage that much different then? Haven't driven the MG yet.
If you drive the MG as an ordinary car, albeit with the higher driving position as per the Kia Venga, it is fine, and between 2 days total and 3 test drives....It drives fine for me. I don't want or need a sportscar or it's performance. For what I would like/want at its price point it fits the bill. I could get a salary sacrifice bigger/better/different car with swmbo nhs leasing, but outright purchasing is my thing.
Otherwise I could buy what I want up to and including a nearly new 2.0 petrol f pace, which i really do like, but afraid of reliability.
It is roomier than the venga, lot bigger boot, i like the styling, the kia Sronic is smaller. If i wanted the same spec dacia it would be the same price, no pre-reg petrols and strictly no discounts...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Secondly, MG is a sporty brand, there is no getting away from that. SAIC resurrected the brand knowing this, so they really should be making sure the cars handle as such. If they want to have a softer and less sporty handling car then they should bring back the Austin name and market it under that.
That would involve handing a huge chunk of money over to BMW, who, after asset stripping, destroying and dumping Rover kept rights the the various marques associated with BL/Rover, the exception being Rover itself, the deal struck with Pheonix is BMW woud resume control of the marque should anything happen to Rover - this was part of the deal when selling Land Rover to Ford to prevent the possibility of a competing 4x4 appearing with a Rover badge - Pheonix were barred from developing an SUV for the same reason. (not many realise BMW only paid £150 million for the Rover groups but got $3.8 BILLION for Land Rover alone.) any suppsedly patriotic Brit who drives a BMW should hang their head in shame.
|
|
|
|
|
If it doesn't have a German badge on the front certain biased British motoring journalists will unfairly discard it like a piece of rubbish.
Edited by Auto Steve on 30/08/2018 at 21:25
|
If it doesn't have a German badge on the front certain biased British motoring journalists will unfairly discard it like a piece of rubbish.
LOL!
|
If it doesn't have a German badge on the front certain biased British motoring journalists will unfairly discard it like a piece of rubbish.
LOL!
It's very true though.
|
If it doesn't have a German badge on the front certain biased British motoring journalists will unfairly discard it like a piece of rubbish.
LOL!
It's very true though.
"DITTO!"
|
If it doesn't have a German badge on the front certain biased British motoring journalists will unfairly discard it like a piece of rubbish.
LOL!
It's very true though.
"DITTO!"
Actually, it isn't. Only if you want to believe that's the case.
|
Perhaps if we said there are certain brands that are more favourably viewed than others.???
The Kia Venga, only gets average reviews, but it is an average car, sensible wheels, sensible driving characteristics but it does what its user group wnats, After all, who would want to do the Stelvio pass in it?
As an aside, I have just had the loan of a ZS, (back tomorrow with no pressure to buy) and should the humour take me , i could very well be tempted. Excite trim, manual. 1.5 4 cyl. found it does about the same as the venga.
But as the immortal saying goes. Suum cuique
Edited by oldroverboy. on 02/09/2018 at 11:10
|
Perhaps if we said there are certain brands that are more favourably viewed than others.???
Yes indeed. And many are actually just as good or even sometimes better than the more favourably viewed brands especially when it comes to standard equipment levels and comfort.
|
|
|
Perhaps if we said there are certain brands that are more favourably viewed than others.???
Agreed but you have highlighted the bit of the Autotrader review you dislike. In fact they gave it 3/5 stars. A quick Google throws up MGZS reviews from six well known magazines/wesites on the first page of results. Their average score is 2.66/5 stars.
Reviews need to highlight perceived shortcomings for the benefit of readers but in this case they mostly conclude that the MGZS is OK for the price.
|
Reviews need to highlight perceived shortcomings for the benefit of readers but in this case they mostly conclude that the MGZS is OK for the price.
Which, strangely enough, is what I said in the first place and on an earlier thread.
Yes. it's boringly average, but after 3days, now, just did another 50 miles, I could live with it, especially for £12k as a pre-reg.
|
|
That was indeed what you said! But if I had to choose, I think I'd go for a Venga (or the equivalent Hyundai, which I think is the ix20) over an MG. More dealers, better build quality, and a better-established brand which has a good name for reliability.
I'd also look at the Dacia Duster and SEAT Arona - the latter to see if it was worth the extra initial cost.
Road testers see it as part of their job to recommend a car which is good to drive. If a buyer merely wants a car to get from A to B as cheaply as possible, that's a different set of priorities - just as valid, but different..
|
|
|
|
|
|
