MG Cyberster vs Chery Tiggo 4

What's the difference?

The Cyberster is certainly an impressive thing in a lot of ways, but if you were expecting a perfect sports car from MG, you'll be a bit disappointed. 

It's quite expensive if you're looking for a nice EV, but on the flip side it's quite cheap if being fast is your main concern.

If anything, the Cyberster is an exciting look at what the brand is capable of, even if it's a bit rough around the edges.

If you’re just looking for an affordable hybrid which will save you money at the pump, the Tiggo 4 will do the trick, but there are so many little things which could be better here, it’s evident you’re getting what you’re paying for.

This makes the Tiggo 4 hybrid a bit of a let down, because the other Cherys I’ve driven recently have been pleasantly surprising given their price-points, not to mention the price-gap between the Tiggo 4 and many of its rivals is nowhere near as large.

MG reckons the Cyberster draws on the proportions of classic roadsters like its MG A and B from the ‘50s and ‘60s.

And I reckon that’s about where the comparison ends, really.

But don’t get me wrong, I think it’s got some pretty angles and nice elements.

It’s got the long bonnet, but its cabin isn't set so far back and its aerodynamic lines and curves probably weren't a priority back then either.

This is the standard colour, English White, which is more like off-white or cream or beige.

You can have a red roof on the lighter colours, white, silver, and grey, but red and yellow Cybersters have black ones.

The tail-lights at the back were inspired by the union jack, but they’re probably one of the elements on this car I'd put in the ‘tacky’ column.

On the outside, I think the Tiggo 4 Hybrid is pretty generic and inoffensive. It shares its 'box-on-wheels' aesthetic with cars like the outgoing Mitsubishi ASX and Hyundai Venue, which, to be fair, have been strong sellers.

It might not be an eye catcher, then, but there’s something to be said for not trying anything controversial, and this is pretty consistent across Chery’s range. In fact, compared to some brands in the market, Chery is doing a solid job of design consistency for its mainline SUVs.

Highlights on the outside include the enormous grille and contemporary LED light strip across the rear.

On the inside things also look pretty swish for this compact SUV category. The seats immediately jump out as a highlight, big and lavishly trimmed in comparatively soft synthetic stuff. The glitzy steering wheel and dual-screen layout continues from other Chery products and the dash design is tidy, if a little generic.

A three-screen dash sounds a little daunting at first, but it’s not that far from the giant screens in some new cars now.

The central 10.25-inch screen is info only, while the flanking 7.0-inch screens are touchscreens, as is the climate control screen in the console.

As much as I’m a fan of physical buttons where possible, this car shows that multiple screens means you don’t need many sub-menus.

Basically, this feels like a lot, but you get used to it relatively quickly.

And while it also seems like MG’s software has become more intuitive and less laggy, the placements of the screens is a little annoying - the side screens on the dash are blocked by the steering wheel, and the central touchscreen is a bit fiddly.

Like I mentioned, no wireless phone mirroring is a let-down and there’s not really an obvious place to put a phone, but the ability to level out the cup holders is kind of interesting and the central storage where the USB-A and C ports are is big enough.

There’s a narrow bit of storage behind the seats, but the boot is actually 249 litres and seems much more usable than you might expect.

It's also worth noting the Cyberster comes with an AC slow charging cable as standard, but not a DC fast-charging cable for plugging in at some charging stations.

I can see this car having a lot of wow factor on a dealer forecourt but up close things are less good. The software on the screens is pretty ordinary; hardly the sharpest, fastest or most logically laid-out. There’s a selection of clumsy-looking themes, and while the multimedia portion has a logical smartphone-style main menu, beneath lies an array of confusing and inconsistently-labelled sub-menus.

The digital dash could be smoother and better looking and it’s a bit confusing to use with the poorly labelled buttons on the steering wheel.

The centre console area is finished in a gloss finish, which is easy to scratch or smear with fingerprints. Up front underneath the main screen is an entirely separate dot-matrix style climate control panel with actual physical buttons. It looks a bit clunky compared to some other solutions on the market, but at least it’s clearly labelled and straightforward to use.

Somewhat infuriatingly, though, interacting with this climate panel brings up a menu on the touchscreen which you don’t need and it takes several seconds to go away. Why?

The cabin is reasonably practical from there, though. There are decent bottle holders in each front door and a further two atop the console. There’s a pass-through beneath, good for handbags and the like. There are some strange additions, like an upright holster with rubberised sides which seems to be for a phone, and behind the shifter there’s a key fob-sized cut-out, but it’s gloss finished, so it will scratch if you actually use it.

The wireless phone charger is tucked away underneath, which makes your phone hard to get at in a pinch, and easy to forget when you exit.

Ergonomically, this car is a bit strange. The seat base is very high, so for me (at 182cm tall) even with the driver’s seat set to its lowest position, my head feels close to the roof. Plus, I’m peering down on the instruments, rather than have them at a comfortable height.

However, there are soft-touch surfaces adorning the doors, which can’t be said for every car in this segment and the rear seat hasn’t been forgotten, either.

I fit pretty comfortably behind my own driving position in terms of knee and headroom and the plush seat trim continues.

There’s a nearly flat floor, so while it’s a reasonably narrow vehicle, at least someone in the centre position will have somewhere to put their feet.

On the amenity front for rear passengers, there’s a small bottle holder in each door, pockets on the backs of the front seats, a weird storage tray and USB port on the back of the centre console and a drop-down armrest with two shallow cupholders. There’s just a single adjustable air vent for rear passengers, so they’ll have to fight over who gets the airflow.

The boot surprised me. It looks tiny, but the brand claims it weighs in at 470 litres. On top of this, the floor is a strange shape because the 12-volt battery is under the floor and doesn’t quite fit level.

However, when I went to load the full three-piece CarsGuide test luggage set, I was surprised to find it fit snugly, with the tailgate able to shut without a problem. I was also impressed to find a space-saver spare wheel and not just a repair kit under the floor.

The Tiggo 4 Hybrid we’ve been driving for this review is the top-spec Ultimate, which wears a price-tag of $34,990, drive-away.

The surprising thing about this is how close it is to rivals. Yes, the Tiggo 4 Hybrid is still more affordable than most of its contemporaries, but it’s not by the same massive margin as its larger models like the Tiggo 7 PHEV ($39,990), which undercut the outgoing Mitsubishi Outlander PHEV by almost $20,000.

Instead, the Tiggo 4 Hybrid only just slips under a Toyota Yaris Cross GX hybrid ($34,790) although the margin increases considering Chery’s offer is drive-away. It also continues to look impressive compared to popular hybrid alternatives from more traditional automakers, like the exxy Honda HR-V (from $39,900) and the sightly larger Hyundai Kona (from $36,950).

The Tiggo 4’s value proposition is also complicated by how much competition there is in this small SUV space. A Haval Jolion hybrid, for example, can be had at $32,990, drive-away and is a slightly larger vehicle with a similar warranty offering, while MG’s ZS Hybrid+ can be had from $33,990, also drive-away, giving you plenty of things to think twice about.

Still, compared to those base prices for rivals, Chery is offering a top-spec and the Tiggo 4 Hybrid is pretty well equipped in this Ultimate form.

On the outside there are some expected things like 17-inch alloys and LED lighting, while on the inside the Tiggo 4 punches above its weight with things like dual 10.25-inch scregens for the multimedia and digital dash, wireless Apple CarPlay and Android Auto, synthetic leather seat trim with power adjust for the driver and heatin in the front two positions, dual-zone climate, a sunroof, ambient interior lighting, a wireless phone charger and a six-speaker stereo system.

There’s also a pretty good 360-degree view parking camera, walk away locking and auto-folding wing mirrors.

At this price, and in this segment, you generally have to spend a lot more to get this level of kit.

Okay, here’s where the Cyberster gets impressive.

Its dual-motor set-up combines a 150kW front motor and a 250kW rear motor for a total of 375kW.

Peak torque is a hefty 725Nm.

All that is enough to get you and two tonnes of MG from zero to 100km/h in 3.2 seconds.

Sure it tops out at 208km/h, but the rush of hitting highway speeds is already enough to put your licence at risk.

The Tiggo 4 hybrid variants pair a 1.5-litre four-cylinder petrol engine with a relatively large electric motor housed in a transaxle-style unit driving the front wheels. In effect, it's continuously variable without being a much-derided CVT auto.

Weirdly, Chery doesn’t state combined power figures, just separate ones for each power source, with the engine producing 72kW/120Nm and the electric motor producing 150kW/310Nm.

You’ll note the electric motor is much more powerful than the engine, which has an effect on the way this car drives.

The MG Cyberster has a 77kWh battery and a claimed efficiency of 19.1kWh/100km.

While that means its claimed driving range of 443km relies on a bit of energy to be recuperated from braking, something you don’t really get on the highway, it actually works in the car’s favour during dynamic driving.

After 264km of driving on a test loop that included some urban but mostly highway and rural driving, the Cyberster’s trip computer displayed a 19.4kWh/100km average consumption.

The battery sat at 27 per cent, with 108km estimated range remaining.

While 443km of total range seems optimistic for a car that’s likely to be driven relatively quickly a lot of the time, the efficiency of the Cyberster held up better than you might have expected.

The whole point of this plugless hybrid set-up is fuel efficiency and on paper it’s not as good as some rivals.

The official combined cycle (urban/extra-urban) economy number is 5.4L/100km, but we easily beat that claim on test with a figure of 4.5L/100km. Worth noting that average came primarily from urban and expressway driving. It seems the hybrid transmission might require significantly more combustion input in freeway scenarios, hence the higher official claim.

A 51-litre fuel tank translates to a 944km range using the official economy figure and around 1100km based on our on-test average.

There’s good news and bad news about the Cyberster from behind the wheel.

The good news is it’s quite easy to drive this thing very fast. 

The bad news is it feels like it would be quite easy to get sick of as a day-to-day car, depending on your situation.

The first thing I noticed is the seat feels a bit high, even at its lowest setting. That's likely due to the placement of the battery pack under the floor of of the car.

Following that, if you’re taller than me (I'm five foot 11), it feels like the wrong road surface will have you nudging your head into the roof liner.

That mechanical roof should take about 15 seconds to lower or raise, and that can be done at speeds up to 50km/h.

It could be a symptom of trying to keep 1985kg tied down, but some of Melbourne's highways and arterial roads between 70 and 100km/h had the Cyberster bobbing quite a bit.

But the suspension doesn't let individual bumps intrude too much into the cabin, so it’s not all bad.

Similarly, there’s good and bad when it comes to the steering and braking.

The first being that the steering seems pretty accurate, even though the feedback is a bit numb. 

The braking on the other hand is handled by some pretty capable Brembos up front that pull the heavy roadster up quickly, but don’t always clamp as hard as you might expect when approaching a traffic light at 60km/h.

But stopping’s one thing, and going’s another.

There are three main drive modes, Comfort, Sport, and Super Sport, which mainly alter the acceleration intensity. And they feel well calibrated.

Comfort keeps things calm and cruisy, Sport is plenty for the road, and Super Sport has the potential to draw the attention of the authorities.

There’s good adjustability when it comes to regen braking, and even a decent single-pedal driving mode.

Aside from a couple of particularly heinous roads, the Cyberster held mostly flat when cornering at high speeds, but the potential for its suspension to let its wheels lose their footing might - or should - stop you from pushing the MG too hard.

At high speeds, there’s a bit of wind noise that you really can’t complain about if you’ve just purchased a drop-top, but the noise, vibration and harshness is decent, all things considered.

My only gripe with the interior fit out is that the passenger seat wobbles a little, and rattles on the surface behind it before moving it forward.

It’s impressive what this car can do in terms of performance, it’s just a shame it’s not more playful.

The Tiggo 4 is a strange one. This hybrid one in particular has me in two minds.

My initial impression was not a good one. The high seating position makes you feel as though you’re sitting on the car rather than in it, and the overly electrically-assisted steering removes you from feeling what’s going on at the front wheels.

Even the pedal feel is wooden, with the car having to modulate the electric and combustion drive components and blended regenerative braking at arms length, leaving the driver with little in the way of feedback.

The ride isn’t one of the worst I’ve had in recent years, with an overall soft enough edge to it, but it also doesn’t feel very sophisticated, and harsher over the rear than it is in the front, giving it an unbalanced character. On top of this, our test car had a couple of intermittent rattling noises in the B-pillar (around where the belt retainer is) as well as somewhere in the rear.

Acceleration is pretty impressive at speeds under 80km/h, however, with plenty of power instantly available from the electric motor, although this has the side-effect of being able to easily overwhelm the Sailun tyres this top-spec Tiggo 4 ships on.

One thing I quite like about the Tiggo 4, however, is how smooth it is. The seemingly primarily electric drive is excellent, particularly at lower speeds where this car is at its best, surging forward largely in silence with no annoyances from a fiddly transmission.

Even the way it blends the combustion power in is seamless, even compared to a Toyota, for example, with the engine distantly buzzing away only when required.

It's impressive that unlike the MG3 and MG ZS which have similarly powerful electric motors but run out of juice and lose a bit of punch when the hybrid battery is low, the Tiggo 4 does a better job of managing its battery reserve level, making sure the strong electric power is always available. This might mean the engine idles higher and longer, but with decent sound deadening, it’s not something you notice much.

Overall the Tiggo 4 is okay to drive. The hybrid components impressed me enough, but these are tarnished by sub-par driver feedback and inputs, handling, tyres and some ergonomic issues.

The Tiggo 4 has a lot of safety kit for this segment and for such an affordable price, so much so that combustion versions have a maximum five-star ANCAP safety rating (although this hybrid variant didn’t exist when it was tested).

Active equipment includes all the key stuff like auto emergency braking, lane departure warning, blind-spot monitoring with rear cross-traffic alert, adaptive cruise and auto high beams.

The 360-degree parking camera is a nice touch and there are seven airbags (dual front, side, curtain and centre).

Is the active stuff annoying? Yes, but you can most of it off and the car remembers your choice next time you start it, so you can turn the most egregious offenders, like lane departure warning, and speed limit assist off. 

Even when they’re on they are okay, but I found the driver monitoring to be the most annoying of the usual crop, pinging at you constantly, sometimes for reasons beyond my comprehension.

The one you can’t seem to permanently turn off is driver attention alert, which is annoying because it is this car’s most egregious offender, chiming at me for even daring to peer down at the digital dash to see how fast I’m going.

MG has a 10-year/250,000km warranty that’s pretty impressive by industry standards, and the warranty also covers its EVs.

It’s important to note that the convertible roof is one of a few items (including 12-volt batteries and light bulbs) that MG covers for less than 10 years. In the case of the roof it’s only five.

It’s worth closely reading the fine print before you crack into buying a car, regardless.

There are also ten capped-price services which occur every 12 months or 25,000km, ranging from $246 to $785. The average price per service is $503.40.

MG also offers free roadside assist for the period of the warranty.

The Tiggo 4 Hybrid is offered with a seven-year/unlimited km warranty, seven years of roadside assist and seven years of capped price servicing with an eight year and unlimited kilometre warranty for the high-voltage battery.

The servicing is required once a year or 15,000km, with each service costing $299 for the first five years. It jumps from there, with a particularly expensive service at $736.62, dragging the yearly average for the warranty period up to $360 a year.

It’s a little pricier than Toyota, for example, but very reasonably priced compared to most.