Rate of solvolysis depends on two factors:
- $\ce{C-X}$ bond energy:
$\ce{C-Br}$ bond is weaker than $\ce{C-Cl}$ bond because, $\ce{C-Br}$ bond is longer than $\ce{C-Cl}$ bond.
- Stability of the carbocation:
The stability of a carbocation can be measured (or compared with others) with the help of their hydride ion affinity(HIA) values. More is the HIA value lesser is that stability of the carbocation. Here are some HIA values for some carbocations:
$$\begin{array}{|c|c|}
\hline
\textrm{Carbocations} & \textrm{HIA values} \\
& (\textrm{in Kcal/mol}) \\
\hline
\ce{CH2=CH-\overset{+}{C}H2}& 256 \\
\ce{(CH3)2\overset{+}{C}H} & 246 \\
\hline
\end{array}$$
The previous answer states that,
Resonance effect is more stronger than hyperconjugation irrespective of the number of α-hydrogens.
I feel this is wrong. Because hyperconjugation is a type of resonance. Effect of hyperconjugation (with one alpha hydrogen) might not be effective as resonance effect but, it is comparable with resonance effect with increase in the number of alpha hydrogens. This can be understood from the HIA values.
Now let's compare the stability of 1-methylcyclohexyl cation and isopropyl cation. Stabilization of cation by inductive effect is more in case of 1-methylcyclohexyl cation because, in 1-methylcyclohexyl cation it is surrounded by more number of carbons than that of in isopropyl cation. As there are more number of alpha hydrogens in 1-methylcyclohexyl cation than in isopropyl cation, the effect of hyperconjugation will be more in case of 1-methylcyclohexyl cation. By combining these two effects we can say that 1-methylcyclohexyl cation is more stable than isopropyl cation. So the HIA value for 1-methylcyclohexyl cation will be less than 246.
So by having a rough idea on the HIA values we can say that 1-methylcyclohexyl cation is more stable than allyl cation. So by combining these two factors we can say that the rate of solvolysis is more for 1-bromo-1-methylcyclohexane than 3-chloropropene.