2009 Land Rover Range Rover Sport vs. 2004 MG ZT-T
To start off, 2009 Land Rover Range Rover Sport is newer by 5 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2004 MG ZT-T. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2004 MG ZT-T would be higher. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2009 Land Rover Range Rover Sport weights approximately 430 kg more than 2004 MG ZT-T.
Because 2009 Land Rover Range Rover Sport is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2004 MG ZT-T. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2009 Land Rover Range Rover Sport will offer significantly more control. With that said, do keep in mind that many other factors such as speed and the wear on your tires can also have significant impact on traction and control. 2009 Land Rover Range Rover Sport has automatic transmission and 2004 MG ZT-T has manual transmission. 2004 MG ZT-T will offer better control over acceleration and deceleration in addition to better fuel efficiency overall. 2009 Land Rover Range Rover Sport will be easier to drive especially in heavy traffic.
Compare all specifications:
| 2009 Land Rover Range Rover Sport | 2004 MG ZT-T | |
| Make | Land Rover | MG |
| Model | Range Rover Sport | ZT-T |
| Year Released | 2009 | 2004 |
| Body Type | SUV | Station Wagon |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Horse Power | 0 HP | 187 HP |
| Top Speed | 194 km/hour | 220 km/hour |
| Drive Type | 4WD | Front |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | Manual |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 5 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 2055 kg | 1625 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4800 mm | 4800 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1820 mm | 1780 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1930 mm | 1430 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2750 mm | 2830 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 22.2 L/100km | 9.9 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 88 L | 65 L |
