MG Cyberster vs Gac Aion Ut

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.

The Aion UT is a cleverly-specified little hatchback and a great entry-point into electric motoring. The software needs a bit of work from a usability perspective, plus the spongy ride and cutesy styling might not be for everyone. 

However, with strong points including driving range, cabin space and value, there’s even a pitch for it in some cases to be an only car compared to most of its price rivals, which are more likely to be thought of as a second car runabout in a two-car garage.

The pick of the range is definitely the entry-level Premium. It comes in at a headline-grabbing price with specs to blow rivals out of the water, while only missing out on a few luxuries.

Note: CarsGuide attended this event as a guest of the manufacturer, with accommodation and meals provided.

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.

GAC tells us the UT hatch was designed in Milan, Italy, but it also isn’t ashamed of the Chinese influence on its overall appearance, like the ultra-short bonnet and Chinese city-car style face.

Along the side it has a modern, aerodynamic profile, and the ultra-short overhangs and long wheelbase maximise the amount of room for batteries under the floor and interior space.

The rear feels a lot like a modern Mini, with its bulbous tailgate and protruding light clusters, spiced up with a sporty spoiler piece jutting out.

It’s not a bad looking thing and it’s available in an array of fun colours.

On the inside it seems to follow the established rule-book of Chinese automakers, with plush trims, big screens with minimal physical buttons as well as a contemporary two-spoke steering wheel.

There’s a trendy floating console which hosts the cupholders and wireless charger on the Luxury grade, and an array of interesting patterns and textures through the doors and dash which you wouldn’t have once seen on a car at this price-point.

However, it is worth noting that while the seats are quite nice, and the steering wheel is a stand-out touchpoint, the trims on the doors and across the dash-top are hard plastics, more so than some of this car’s rivals.

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.

In terms of interior space, the Aion UT stands out with its spacious cabin. At 182cm tall, I am easily able to find a comfortable seating position, and visibility out the front sides and rear, while not as good as some small SUVs, isn’t bad.

There’s lots of headroom, and while I mentioned the hard plastic door cards before, there’s enough padding everywhere your elbows are going to touch to make it feel a bit nicer than perhaps it is.

The main drawback of this car for me is the lack of tactile buttons and the frustrating software.

The main screen isn’t particularly well utilised, being taken up by either a background or the navigation map, with an array of typically small shortcuts across the bottom for important features like the climate control or settings menus.

You can pre-set a few information panels which sit above the shortcut bar as in many rival cars and there’s also a shortcut tray which can be hosted on the driver’s side and configured with a variety of shortcuts and settings.

It’s just a bit clumsy to use, and the array of poorly-labelled settings menus for things like active safety equipment feel needlessly complicated.

I’d love to see this car with physical controls for climate and multimedia to make it easier to live with.

Up front the storage is decent. There are big pockets in the doors and a large storage tray between the driver and front passenger thanks to a flat floor. There’s also a slightly weird storage box under the touchscreen which has a net inside, good for more delicate objects you don’t want flying around the cabin.

On the floating console there are two cupholders which are a bit too shallow for my liking, and the wireless charger feels almost pointless because its made of a hard plastic, so your phone just slides right off in the corners. The cabled outlets are hidden beneath which allows for tidy cable management and the centre armrest console box is a healthy size.

The rear seat is comparatively basic, although touches on the key points. Its main advantage is how generous the space is. My frame was able to fit behind my own driving position with heaps of room for my knees, and just enough room for my head despite the dip in the roof for the sunroof shade in the Luxury-grade car we tested. There may be even more headroom in the base car.

The flat floor makes the space useful even for three across in a pinch and there’s a drop-down armrest with (again, shallow) cupholders. There are pockets on the back of both front seats and smallish pockets in each door. The array of soft trims continues, too, and the back of the centre console features a partially adjustable air vent. Luxury spec cars get a single USB rear power outlet.

As with many Chinese cars in this segment, the generous rear seat space comes at a cost to the boot. It measures just 321 litres, which is slightly smaller than its main opponents in this category, although larger than some hatchbacks like the Toyota Corolla, for example.

It has its advantages, though. The floor is two-tiered, and can offer a flat load area with the rear seats folded down, or a deeper boot in its lower position. Underneath there’s a cutaway good for charging equipment and the tyre repair kit (sorry, no spare wheel in here).

Unlike some EVs, the Aion UT doesn’t get a frunk (front boot) for additional storage.

The GAC Aion UT starts from $31,990, before on-road costs, for the entry-level Premium grade, which makes it the third-most affordable EV you can buy in Australia after the city-sized BYD Atto 1 and the entry-level version of the BYD Dolphin.

It sits closer to price-parity with the GWM Ora, but is significantly more affordable than the rear-drive MG4 and more spec-competitive top-grade BYD Dolphin.

The bigger threat to the Aion UT is that a lot of buyers will be willing to spend slightly more to get into one of the most affordable electric small SUVs, like the BYD Atto 2 or Jaecoo J5.

Still, GAC makes a solid pitch for its hatch, which offers a higher spec level than its most direct price rivals.

For example, the Aion UT is more powerful than the entry-level Dolphin and Ora while offering a higher level of interior equipment. 

Even the just-arrived front-drive MG4 Urban also starts at $31,990, but that’s for a version with significantly less driving range.

In fact, I’d go so far as to say the entry-level version of the Aion UT (the confusingly-named Premium) is probably the pick of the two variant range.

Standard equipment levels on this car include 17-inch alloy wheels, LED lighting all around, synthetic leather interior trim with heated and power adjust front seats, a 14.6-inch multimedia touchscreen with online connectivity and built-in nav as well as wireless Apple CarPlay and Android Auto.

There’s also an 8.88-inch digital instrument cluster, heated steering wheel and the full array of safety kit.

With the same power and battery size, this leaves only arguably unnecessary luxuries for the Luxury grade, like a wireless phone charger, ventilated driver’s seat, auto dimming rear vision mirror with auto power folding wing mirrors, a powered tailgate and of course, a panoramic sunroof (with shade!).

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 Aion UT has a front-mounted electric motor producing 150kW/210Nm. That’s plenty punchy for any hatchback at this price, and I like the way the brand hasn’t messed around with a sub-100kW motor in the base variant to push prospects towards the top-spec car.

It’s more powerful than all of its closest rivals and at the time of writing you’ll have to spend four to six thousand dollars more to get into something equivalent from BYD, Chery, Jaecoo, Leapmotor or MG.

It even has a claimed 0-100km/h sprint time as low as 7.3 seconds.

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 Aion UT has a 60kWh lithium-iron phosphate (LFP) battery pack, which grants it a WLTP-certified 430km of driving range.

That’s more than its closest rivals, like the entry-level Ora Standard Range (310km), BYD Dolphin Essential (410km) or BYD Atto 2 (345km).

Claimed efficiency is 16.4kWh/100km and the car I tested returned a consumption of 14.0kWh/100km over a 130km route of mixed conditions, which isn’t bad at all.

Charging speeds are less impressive, but realistically appropriate for the relatively small battery. The peak DC charging capacity of 87kW means a charge time which the brand quotes at 24 minutes, but this is from 30-80 per cent. Expect closer to 40 minutes for a 10-80 per cent charge.

AC charging is decent, at 11kW. This should have you charging from 10-80 per cent between four and five hours.

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 drive experience can be where a lot of Chinese cars fall down but I walked away less frustrated by the Aion UT.

That’s not to say it will behave as you might expect a low-slung hatchback to. The suspension, for example, is extremely soft as it maintains its original Chinese-market state-of-tune.

This makes the car waft over imperfections on city roads. And in that sense it offers supreme ride comfort in the scenarios it was designed for. However, at the extremes, like some speed bumps, or particularly deep pot holes there can be a surprisingly violent re-bound sending a thud through the cabin.

The other trade-off for soft suspension is less body control. I was surprised to find that the Aion UT holds it together mostly well on a flat country B-road, but when undulations and big dips introduce themselves, the soft suspension can be too slow to react, making the car lose confidence in higher-speed open road scenarios we’re more used to in Australia.

The steering, like many electric cars in this category, is relatively heavily electrically assisted. This makes it light and easy to adjust at low speeds for easy park and maneuverability in the confines of a city. It loses a little bit of road-feel at higher speeds but the Aion UT’s steering is far from the least connected I’ve experienced recently.

One thing it can’t be criticised for is a lack of power. With 150kW instantaneously available the Aion UT has some serious poke and while the ChaoYang tyre package is tuned more for efficiency than grip, it’s again not one of the worst I’ve driven with.

One thing which helps the whole experience along is this car’s hatchback layout. With the weight of the battery low and squat and the wheels all the way out to the edges of the frame, the Aion UT inherently handles decently compared to an electric crossover or small SUV.

Like all Chinese cars, the UT has a host of occasionally frustrating driver aids, which you can read about in the Safety section below. While I was inclined to turn some of the features off after testing them, the alerts are relatively quiet and non-invasive.

Is the UT any good to drive? It’s not bad for the segment, I was largely pleased with how it handled and the power on offer, and while it still has its annoyances, they’re not big deal-breakers. 

The MG4 rear-drive is a better allrounder, while the GWM Ora isn’t as good. I’d say it’s on par with the BYD Dolphin, but they excel in different areas. The Dolphin's a bit sharper in terms of handling but the Aion UT is more comfortable.

As with many Chinese cars the list of active safety equipment is long but that doesn’t mean it’s particularly well calibrated.

Standard gear includes the key stuff like auto emergency braking (AEB), lane keep assist, blind-spot monitoring, rear cross-traffic alert and adaptive cruise control. There are also rarer features for an affordable car like this including traffic sign recognition, door open warning, auto high beams and front cross-traffic alert.

On the parking front you get a 360-degree parking camera view as well as front and rear proximity sensors.

There's also an annoying driver monitoring system and one I haven’t seen much in the form of an occupant warning system, which seems to imagine you’re not wearing a seatbelt when you are.

It’s not the only safety system I found myself reaching to turn off. The lane keep assist could occasionally be a bit heavy-handed and the traffic sign alert was typically frustrating. This, sadly, is what we’ve come to expect from these types of systems from many Chinese automakers.

It’s not the most annoying system I’ve used, though, and the alerts are quiet enough and far enough apart that they aren't as intrusive as they can be in some rivals. You can also adjust the tolerance of some of the systems in the (needlessly complicated) menus to make them less annoying.

At the launch, the Aion UT was yet to be rated by ANCAP.

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.

GAC covers this electric hatch with an eight-year and unlimited kilometre warranty, while the brand’s “magazine battery 2.0” is covered by a separate eight-year and 200,000km warranty. Five years of roadside assistance is included.

The Aion UT needs to be serviced once a year or 15,000km. The service price schedule extends all the way out to 240,000km with yearly visits costing between $199 and $640 but for the life of the warranty the average yearly cost comes in at $352.

There are currently 19 GAC dealers in Australia, confined mainly to Melbourne, Sydney and Brisbane with a single store in Perth and an outlier in Cairns. No representation yet in Tassie, Canberra, the Northern Territory or SA.