Hybrid urban SUVs face-off: GWM Haval Jolion vs MG ZS comparison

With MG launching its new ZS Hybrid+ range in Australia in late 2024, and GWM releasing an updated Haval Jolion Hybrid, cost-conscious buyers looking to maximise value without running short on equipment have two sharply priced options to choose from.

Both boast modern designs on the outside and promise miserly running thanks to their hybrid drivetrain. Whereas established brands offer base models with slimmer equipment lists for the equivalent spend of these two models, GWM and MG let you pick from the top shelf.

To find the best hybrid SUV on a budget, we pored over the interior and equipment, analysed safety systems, and put these cars through their paces on city streets and open roads to validate efficiency claims and find the best feel from behind the wheel. There can only be one winner, so buckle up and join us for the ride.

The mid-spec Haval Jolion Lux Hybrid driven here is priced from $35,990 drive-away normally, or currently under offer priced from $34,990. Premium paint finishes like the Arctic Blue shown here cost an extra $495, but the standard Hamilton White doesn't add to the price.

MG offers the ZS Hybrid+ Essence from $36,990 drive-away, and given the relative newness of this model, there are no special offers or further discounts as this comparison was written. Premium paint attracts a $700 surcharge, like the Black Pearl shown here, with Dover White the only no-charge colour.

The step from petrol to hybrid adds a not insignificant $8000 to the price of the Haval Jolion Lux with recently announced discounts across the petrol range. At regular retail prices that difference is $6000. MG offers two non-hybrid alternatives in top-spec Essence trim, the ZS Essence Turbo is priced $5000 below the hybrid, and the non-turbo Essence is $7000 cheaper.

In the Haval Jolion Lux you'll find features like LED headlights, a 360-degree camera system, keyless entry and start, faux leather on the seats and steering wheel, dual-zone climate control, heated front seats with power adjustment for the driver, six-speaker audio, and a 7.0-inch driver's display. The Lux Hybrid also includes 18-inch wheels, and a larger 12.3-inch infotainment screen (up from 10.25 inches) that aren't on the petrol model.

That's most bases covered, but if you want to add more, the Haval Jolion Ultra goes further steps up again with things like a powered passenger seat, a big panoramic sunroof, a driver's head-up display, front park sensors and auto-parking capabilities, and interior ambient lighting.

In the MG ZS Hybrid+ Essence you get a similar list of standard equipment with LED headlights, a 360-degree camera system, keyless entry and start, faux leather on the seats and steering wheel, single-zone climate control, heated front seats with power adjustment for the driver, six-speaker audio, and a 7.0-inch driver's display, a 12.3-inch infotainment screen and 18-inch wheels.

Over the Haval Jolion Lux, the ZS Essence comes with a panoramic sunroof to justify its price premium, but the Haval Jolion Ultra helps balance that spec difference out.

Even though it looks fresh on the outside, the Haval Jolion's update is actually a reskin of the old model. Key structural dimensions stay the same and the interior design is a carryover from before. The MG ZS, meanwhile, is an all-new model that's a little larger than before, opening up extra interior space, and with a much more contemporary design.

From the front seat, the two are quite different, but further back things are more closely matched.

The driving position in the MG ZS is high and upright, making it easy to get in and out of the car and providing a commanding view of the road ahead. The Haval Jolion, on the other hand, has quite a low-slung driving position. You sit lower in the cabin, and while you can still see out just fine, it's not as lofty as the MG.

The MG has only a tilt-adjustable steering wheel, the GWM has tilt and reach, but in both cases the wheel feels a long way away. You'll need to bring your seat forward to get a comfortable reach. I have quite long arms and even I found the wheel too distant in both cars. The ZS has very low-set pedals too, which also require a forward seat position, but this ties in nicely with the upright and accessible driving position.

Storage spaces are mix-and-match. Both have small cupholders, but the MG's are a little more flexible. You'll probably want to leave your Stanley cup at home in either car, though. The MG has a small console, the GWM has a bigger console and extra storage under the console that the ZS lacks, but then the ZS has more trays for keys, phones, wallets, hair ties, and the like.

Astoundingly, neither car offers a wireless phone charger, but the more expensive Haval Jolion Ultra does come with one, though the Lux tested here does not.

In terms of equipment, the two cars match on things like leather-look interior trim, leather-wrapped steering wheel (GWM specifies faux-leather), powered driver's seat, heated front seats, keyless entry and push-button start, auto-dimming rear-view mirror, power-folding exterior mirrors with heating, rear seat air vents, 60:40 folding rear seats, 18-inch alloy wheels, dusk-sensing LED headlights, and rain-sensing windscreen wipers.

The MG ZS Hybrid+ Essence comes with a panoramic sunroof, but only single-zone climate control. The Haval Jolion Lux shown here comes with dual-zone climate control, but misses those other items. The up-spec Ultra comes with them, as well as a head-up display not offered on any variant of the MG ZS.

In the rear seats the two cars are a closer match. There's plenty of room in both cases, but the Haval Jolion offers a touch more leg room compared to the MG ZS that offers slightly more head room. The Jolion has a flat floor and a fold-down armrest, the ZS has a small bump in the floor, though it's only minor and lacks an armrest.

Both cars will fit three across the rear, but the armrest in the Haval Jolion makes the centre position very firm. The ZS is the better bet for long-range comfort. Both have rear seat air vents, and USB-A outlets for the rear seats, one in the ZS and two in the Haval Jolion.

GWM's quoted boot capacity of 255 litres falls short of the MG ZS's 443L claim. The ZS claims a boot that is both taller and longer to free up the extra space. It also has under-floor storage that the Jolion lacks. With the seats folded the Haval Jolion has 916L available, the ZS has 1457L. The ZS also comes with two bag hooks and two tie-down points, the Haval Jolion has only one bag hook, and it's positioned so low as to be almost useless.

Both cars have their 12-volt battery accessible underneath the boot floor, and both come with a tyre repair kit instead of a spare wheel of any kind.

Screen real estate feels like the battleground where new car wars are won and lost. While I wouldn't exactly accuse one brand of copying another's homework, both these two cars feature matching-sized 12.3-inch infotainment screens and 7.0-inch digital instrument displays. That's where the similarities end, though.

The MG ZS has a much newer system. It has a layout similar to other MG products, with a tiled homepage that makes it easy to adjust climate control or media without needing to jump between menu screens. It's responsive to touch inputs and has onscreen menus that are logical and allow quick access to different functions.

The Haval Jolion isn't as sharp. While the screen is the same size, its processor power feels generations behind. It can be laggy or slow to respond, and the onscreen menus are chaotic until you get your head around them, with descriptions that aren't always immediately obvious.

Both cars come loaded with AM/FM radio and Bluetooth, plus wired Apple CarPlay and Android Auto, but no wireless smartphone mirroring. The ZS also comes with features like integrated satellite navigation (which is easy to use) and digital radio, features not found on the Haval Jolion.

The MG also offers an iSmart companion app, allowing remote access to vehicle functions like remote lock/unlock, vehicle location, route planning, and status checks. Access is included for the first 12 months and offered via subscription after that. GWM doesn't offer app access for the Haval Jolion.

Worth pointing out too that while MG calls the instrument screen a "12.3-inch Virtual Driver Instrument Display" the outer sections are simply light-up LCD panels, with a 7.0-inch display in between, the same as the Haval Jolion. Both cars offer plenty of display options, but both also default to their driver-assist screens and make it hard to access the other info and trip data available.

To make things just a little more difficult, crash-test body ANCAP implements more demanding protocols every few years and the 2022 result for the GWM Haval Jolion, and 2024 result for the MG ZS, were obtained under different assessment criteria.

The GWM Haval Jolion boasts a five-star rating, the MG ZS has a less-than-ideal four-star score. Picking the safer car isn't as clear-cut as looking at the outright star rating. There's no guarantee a Haval Jolion tested to the current standard would repeat a five-star result.

If you're wondering, ANCAP has added a wider range of cyclist and pedestrian detection for autonomous braking systems, plus car-to-car, car-to-motorcycle, and other AEB scenarios. Child presence detection, driver attention monitor systems and more all form part of the ZS's overall score that the Jolion wasn't assessed for.

The Haval Jolion's five-star ANCAP safety rating comprises a 90 per cent adult occupant protection score, 84 per cent child occupant protection rating, 64 per cent for vulnerable road user (pedestrian and cyclist) protection, and 92 per cent for safety assist systems.

The MG ZS received a 75 per cent adult occupant protection score, 84 per cent child occupant protection rating, 73 per cent for vulnerable road user (pedestrian and cyclist) protection, and 79 per cent for safety assist systems.

On paper, the GWM Haval Jolion and MG ZS appear to have a lot in common, but on the road a very noticeable gap appears.

Both list common safety features, like autonomous emergency braking (with pedestrian and cyclist detection and junction intervention), rear cross-traffic alert, lane-centring and lane-keep assist with emergency lane-keep intervention, tyre pressure monitoring, adaptive cruise control, blind-spot monitoring, safe exit assist, and rear collision warning.

There are minor specification differences. The GWM has a driver-monitoring camera and rear cross-traffic braking, while the MG ZS comes with adaptive cruise control that includes speed limit assist and an over-speed warning.

In both cars, a 360-degree camera system with multiple views is available. The ZS comes with only rear park sensors, but the Haval Jolion has front and rear sensors.

As comprehensive as the list of safety features is, in the real world the interactions of GWM's driver-assist functions show there's significant room for improvement. The system isn't dangerous, but it is a bit dimwitted and slow to react.

I found adaptive cruise control didn't always recognise if a car had entered the lane in front of it, and would clumsily stab the brakes when it recognised an object ahead. At other times it would fall well behind the pace of lead vehicles. The lane-assist chimes that it is 'active' constantly and tugs abruptly at the wheel, even when there's clear space on either side of the car and lane placement is only a little off-centre.

The driver-facing camera is designed to detect when the driver isn't paying attention. Some of these systems can be aggressive, but the Haval Jolion will allow you to check mirrors or glance at the infotainment briefly before it issues a warning.

The MG ZS does things differently. It's still not perfect, but the adaptive cruise control feels more alert and more responsive to traffic around it. Lane-keeping and assist functions are smoother than the Haval Jolion, but can occasionally snatch at the wheel in some situations.

The ZS has a speed detection function that reads traffic signs and alerts you if you run over speed limits.

Systems like the lane assist and driver monitoring can be turned off via the infotainment screen, but they revert to on each time the car is started.

GWM has updated its capped-price servicing program. Owners with a 2024 warranty start date will pay $1650 over its course, while cars first registered in 2025 incur a higher service price of $2020 over five years, and each service is priced differently with the most expensive (four years or 55,000km) priced at $550 or $680 depending on the vehicle year. The first service is set at 12 months or 10,000km, and after that, each following service is every 12 months or 15,000km.

MG's capped-price plans equate to $1232 over five years/75,000km, with the most expensive of the first five capped-price services costing $432. Intervals are set at a uniform 12 months or 15,000km.

GWM offers a seven-year warranty on the vehicle, with eight years on the hybrid battery, plus five years of roadside assist. The MG ZS Hybrid+ and its high-voltage battery are covered by the brand’s new 10-year/250,000km warranty, whichever comes first – the longest in the new-car market.

Both of these small SUVs deliver fuel consumption benefits compared to their non-hybrid counterparts, but neither is the most efficient you can buy.

GWM quotes official fuel consumption of 5.1 litres per 100 kilometres, while MG quotes a 4.7L/100km figure in combined-cycle testing – meaning a mix of highway and urban driving. In testing the real-world consumption saw the Haval Jolion settle at 6.6L/100km with the ZS using a thriftier 5.6L/100km.

But as these are urban SUVs, we also ran a purely urban consumption loop. There's a much bolder difference in claims here with GWM quoting 3.7L/100km compared to the incredibly thrifty 0.9L/100km claimed by the MG. We tested on an inner-suburban loop with speeds not exceeding 60km/h and plenty of traffic, roundabouts, and stop lights to contend with. In these conditions, the Haval Jolion used 6.3L/100km (or 70 per cent more than claimed) and the ZS used 5.7L/100km, making it more efficient but putting it 533 per cent over its official figure.

For comparison, Drive has tested rivals like the Honda HR-V hybrid at 4.8L/100km in mixed use, the Hyundai Kona hybrid at 4.3L/100km, and the Toyota Corolla Cross AWD as low as 4.9L/100km.

Both systems lean heavily on their electric motors, usually moving off from stopped on electric propulsion before the engine kicks in. A heavier foot brings the petrol engine in earlier too. At steady highway speeds, both can shut down the petrol engine for short electric stints too.

The Haval Jolion Hybrid can accept 91-octane regular unleaded, making it a little cheaper at each refuel. The ZS Hybrid+ recommends 95-octane premium unleaded as a minimum, eating into the fuel consumption advantage a little with higher fuelling costs.

On the road, these two compact hybrid SUVs offer some expected similarities, along with some significant differences.

Spec sheet analysis reveals a close match with both using a 1.5-litre naturally aspirated petrol engine as the basis for their hybrid systems. Both are front-wheel drive only, with no all-wheel-drive option. Even power outputs are close, with the Haval Jolion producing a combined 140kW and 375Nm, and the ZS listed as having 158kW and a more prodigious 465Nm combined.

Those are near hot-hatch levels of power, and in reality, neither car feels like it fully deploys those outputs. While there's no doubt some overlap between the petrol and electric sides of each system, the resulting acceleration is much more measured.

The Haval Jolion feels the more eager of the two. It has a more responsive off-the-line reaction from a standing start, and a predictable mid-range push if you ask for a burst of rolling acceleration.

The MG ZS isn't a slouch by any means, but it feels more measured in the way it steps off the line. It also has a frustratingly variable pedal response. Pushing the accelerator becomes a bit of a lottery as to whether you'll get a zippy reaction or a much more slovenly response. I tried as hard as I could to see if acceleration and battery charge were linked, but the state of charge didn't appear to impact the result.

Similarly, when asking for a burst of rolling acceleration, the ZS is much more timid. It will try to hurry things along, but the system holds itself back for a couple of seconds before combining both drivetrain systems for full acceleration. In many situations, full power comes on tap just as you lift off the accelerator.

Dynamically, the MG is the superior choice. It has well-weighted steering and a consistent feel through bends. The Haval Jolion's steering still carries some weight, but it can load up unevenly as you wind on lock and either become over-assisted mid-corner, or suddenly heavy, feeling like there's too much mechanical drag.

The ZS also takes the win for ride comfort. On busy surfaces, the gently sprung MG can keep pace with cobbles and patchy surfaces and is a great fit for city streets. As the pace picks up, it maintains its composure, stable on the highway and only rattled by severe potholes or successive corrugations.

The Haval Jolion has a harder time settling over imperfections, and can bob and rock as it tries to deal with suspension hits. On busy multi-surface roads that can lead to a much less settled ride. Any on-road shine the GWM has is also eroded by the driver-assist systems, which can intervene at inopportune times and further upset comfort and fluency on a drive.

Interestingly, the ZS has a simpler torsion beam suspension compared to the more sophisticated multi-link independent rear of the Haval Jolion. That suggests the dynamic edge should belong to the GWM, but the spring and damper tuning appears to let the Haval Jolion down. Weight potentially also plays a part here with the ZS weighing in 175kg lighter than the Haval Jolion.

Going into this comparison, I thought this could be a close fight. Based on specifications, these two city-sized hybrid SUVs have much in common. In real-world testing, the differences between them soon became very apparent.

The value of either model is unquestionable. Both represent fantastic buying with lengthy equipment lists and spacious interiors. Their dimensions make them right at home in busy city and suburban settings, but their seat space provides the flexibility to be comfortably used for carrying friends and family.

Between its more sorted driving behaviour, and much more user-friendly driver assist and safety technologies, the MG ZS is the car to buy in this comparison.

MG has put to bed any memories of the previous, often lacklustre ZS, and this new-generation model delivers a much more rewarding and capable small SUV. A more efficient hybrid system and a longer new car warranty are added bonuses ensuring that the ZS ticks as many boxes as it can in an aim to impress new car buyers.

Kez Casey migrated from behind spare parts counters to writing about cars over ten years ago. Raised by a family of automotive workers, Kez grew up in workshops and panel shops before making the switch to reviews and road tests for The Motor Report, Drive and CarAdvice.

Read more about Kez Casey