Well, these are two pretty similar cars we have here! It's only details that could potentially make the difference. Considering they both belong to the luxury car segment and utilize the same 4-door sedan body style and the front wheel drive system, it all comes up to the specific petrol engine choice they offer. Both the engines are Rover-engineered . The first one has a 6-cylinder, 24-valves 160hp unit, while the other one gets its power and torque from a 6-cylinder, 24-valves 177hp one.

Eventhough they might appear to be different models, both cars are actually structurally the same, so none of the two gets an advantage over the other when it comes to safety.

Manufacturers have been building their reliability reputation for decades now and, generally speaking, it appears that Rover as a brand displays somewhat better results, when all the models are taken into account. These are the official statistics, while our visitors describe reliability of MG with an average rating of , and models under the Rover badge with 4.5 out of 5. Unfortunatelly, I don't have enough insight that would allow me to comment in more details on the specific models level. Above it all, drivers of cars with the same engine as MG ZT rank it on average as 3.0, while the one under the competitor's bonnet gets 5.0 out of 5.

MG is a bit more agile, reaching 100km/h in 0.3 seconds less than its competitor. Still, it lacks the power to win the top speed competition, topping at 211 kilometers per hour, 4km/h less than the other car. When it comes to fuel economy the winner has to be MG ZT, averaging around 9.4 liters of fuel per 100 kilometers (30 mpg), in combined cycle. We can't ignore that 12% difference compared to Rover 75.

Rover definitely wins the reliability competition, everything taken into consideration. The most important thing when deciding between any two vehicles should always be safety, both passive and active. In this case though, it seems that both cars show similar levels of passenger protection all together, so that won't break a tie. But one thing that actually could is the performance, with MG offering somewhat better performance, just enough to call it quicker. To make things even better, it consumps less fuel! No mistake, whatever you decide here, but I'd still go for the MG. In any case that's my personal view, built upon all the data available to me. What should decide here though is the way you feel about the two vehicles, and I hope you'll find my guidelines useful in the process. Also, you could use the oportunity to find out which car, everything taken into account, would be the perfect choice for you in the eyes of the virtual adviser™, among thousands of similar, yet so different vehicles.