Mini Hatch (F56)
Car comparison
Mini Hatch (F56) Cooper SD 2.0vsAbarth 695 XSR Yamaha 1.4 T-Jet
Compare specs, acceleration, fuel consumption, dimensions, practicality, and estimated running costs side by side.
New comparisonAbarth 695
XSR Yamaha 1.4 T-Jet
Comparison overview
Use the estimates as comparison hints and verify exact figures before making decisions.
Best choices
Mini Hatch (F56) Cooper SD 2.0
- Quickest 0-100 km/h7.3 s
- Fastest top speed227 km/h141 mph
- Most powerful170 hp127 kW
- Highest torque360 Nm266 lb-ft
- Lowest combined fuel consumption4.0 L/100 km58.8 mpg US70.6 mpg UK
- Lowest city consumption4.9 L/100 km48.0 mpg US57.6 mpg UK
- Lowest highway consumption3.6 L/100 km65.3 mpg US78.5 mpg UK
- Lowest CO2 emissions106 g/km
- Best estimated range1,100 km684 mi
- Largest trunk211 L
- Best overall score53/100
- Best performance score52/100
- Best economy score96/100
- Best practicality score56/100
Abarth 695 XSR Yamaha 1.4 T-Jet
- Lightest1,110 kg2,447 lb
- Best power-to-weight149 hp/t111 kW/t6.7 kg/hp
Specification comparison
| Model | MiniHatch (F56)Cooper SD 2.0 | Abarth695XSR Yamaha 1.4 T-Jet |
|---|---|---|
| Power | 170hp127kW | 165hp123kW |
| Torque | 360Nm266lb-ft | 230Nm170lb-ft |
| Curb weight | 1,175kg2,590lb | 1,110kg2,447lb |
| Gross weight | 1,655kg3,649lb | 1,425kg3,142lb |
| Top speed | 227 km/h 141 mph | 217 km/h 135 mph |
| To 99% top speed | 75.5s99% target: 225 km/h / 140 mph Calculated | 69.6s99% target: 215 km/h / 133 mph Calculated |
| 0-100 km/h | 7.3s | 7.3s |
| 0-200 km/h | 31.6s Calculated | 35.8s Calculated |
| 0-60 mph | 6.9s Calculated | 6.9s Calculated |
| Fuel consumption | 4L/100 km58.8mpg US70.6mpg UK | 6L/100 km39.2mpg US47.1mpg UK |
| Fuel consumption city | 4.9L/100 km48mpg US57.6mpg UK | 7.9L/100 km29.8mpg US35.8mpg UK |
| Fuel consumption highway | 3.6L/100 km65.3mpg US78.5mpg UK | 4.9L/100 km48mpg US57.6mpg UK |
| Quarter mile | 15.2s Calculated | 15.3s Calculated |
| Power-to-weight | 145hp/t108kW/t66hp/1000 lb Calculated | 149hp/t111kW/t67hp/1000 lb Calculated |
| Torque-to-weight | 306Nm/t205lb-ft/ton Calculated | 207Nm/t139lb-ft/ton Calculated |
| Estimated range | 1,100km684mi Calculated | 583km362mi Calculated |
| Displacement | 1,995cc122cu in | 1,368cc83cu in |
| Length | 3,821mm150in | 3,657mm144in |
| Width | 1,727mm68in | 1,647mm65in |
| Height | 1,414mm56in | 1,485mm58in |
| Wheelbase | 2,495mm98in | 2,300mm91in |
| Front track | 1,485mm58in | - |
| Rear track | 1,485mm58in | - |
| Ground clearance | 143mm6in | - |
| Trunk volume | 211L | 185L |
| Max trunk volume | - | 610L |
| Doors | 3 | 3 |
| Seats | 4 | 4 |
| Fuel tank | 44L | 35L |
| CO2 emissions | 106g/km | 139g/km |
Performance charts
Use the estimates as comparison hints and verify exact figures before making decisions.
Dyno simulation
Estimated stock-style power and torque curves by engine speed.
- Mini Hatch (F56) Cooper SD 2.0: Power / Torque
- Abarth 695 XSR Yamaha 1.4 T-Jet: Power / Torque
| Vehicle | Peak power RPM | Peak torque RPM | Max engine speed |
|---|---|---|---|
| MiniHatch (F56)Cooper SD 2.0 | 4,000 rpm | 1,500-2,750 rpm | 4,250 rpm |
| Abarth695XSR Yamaha 1.4 T-Jet | 5,500 rpm | 3,000 rpm | 5,750 rpm |
Acceleration curve
Estimated speed over time for selected vehicles.
| Metric | MiniHatch (F56)Cooper SD 2.0 | Abarth695XSR Yamaha 1.4 T-Jet |
|---|---|---|
| Acceleration checkpoints | ||
0-60 mph 0-97 km/h | 6.9 s | 6.9 s |
0-100 km/h 0-62 mph | 7.3 s | 7.3 s |
0-200 km/h 0-124 mph | 31.6 s | 35.8 s |
| Top speed | 227 km/h 141 mph | 217 km/h 135 mph |
| Drag race simulation | ||
60 ft 18 m | 2.6 s | 2.6 s |
330 ft 101 m | 6.7 s | 6.7 s |
1/8 mile 201 m | 10.0 s | 10.0 s |
1000 ft 305 m | 12.9 s | 12.9 s |
1/4 mile 402 m | 15.2 s | 15.3 s |
Trap speed 1/4 mile 402 m | 153 km/h 95 mph | 151 km/h 94 mph |
Power comparison
Bar comparison chart for Power. Higher is better · hp / kW
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| MiniHatch (F56)Cooper SD 2.0 | 170 hp 127 kW |
| Abarth695XSR Yamaha 1.4 T-Jet | 165 hp 123 kW |
Mini Hatch (F56) Cooper SD 2.0 has 5 hp more than Abarth 695 XSR Yamaha 1.4 T-Jet.
The biggest power difference is between Abarth 695 XSR Yamaha 1.4 T-Jet and Mini Hatch (F56) Cooper SD 2.0: 5 hp (4 kW).
Torque comparison
Bar comparison chart for Torque. Higher is better · Nm / lb-ft
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| MiniHatch (F56)Cooper SD 2.0 | 360 Nm 266 lb-ft |
| Abarth695XSR Yamaha 1.4 T-Jet | 230 Nm 170 lb-ft |
Curb weight comparison
Bar comparison chart for Curb weight. Lower is better · kg / lb
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| MiniHatch (F56)Cooper SD 2.0 | 1,175 kg 2,590 lb |
| Abarth695XSR Yamaha 1.4 T-Jet | 1,110 kg 2,447 lb |
Top speed without limiter comparison
Bar comparison chart for Top speed without limiter. Higher is better · km/h / mph
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| MiniHatch (F56)Cooper SD 2.0 | 227 km/h 141 mph |
| Abarth695XSR Yamaha 1.4 T-Jet | 217 km/h 135 mph |
0-100 km/h comparison
Bar comparison chart for 0-100 km/h. Lower is better · seconds
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| MiniHatch (F56)Cooper SD 2.0 | 7.3 s |
| Abarth695XSR Yamaha 1.4 T-Jet | 7.3 s |
Fuel consumption comparison
Bar comparison chart for Fuel consumption. Lower is better · L/100 km / mpg US / mpg UK
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| MiniHatch (F56)Cooper SD 2.0 | 4.0 L/100 km 58.8 mpg US 70.6 mpg UK |
| Abarth695XSR Yamaha 1.4 T-Jet | 6.0 L/100 km 39.2 mpg US 47.1 mpg UK |
The biggest fuel consumption difference is between Mini Hatch (F56) Cooper SD 2.0 and Abarth 695 XSR Yamaha 1.4 T-Jet: 2.0 L/100 km.
Power-to-weight comparison
Bar comparison chart for Power-to-weight. Higher is better · hp/t / kW/t
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| MiniHatch (F56)Cooper SD 2.0 | 145 hp/t 108 kW/t 6.9 kg/hp |
| Abarth695XSR Yamaha 1.4 T-Jet | 149 hp/t 111 kW/t 6.7 kg/hp |
Estimated range comparison
Bar comparison chart for Estimated range. Higher is better · km / mi
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| MiniHatch (F56)Cooper SD 2.0 | 1,100 km 684 mi |
| Abarth695XSR Yamaha 1.4 T-Jet | 583 km 362 mi |
Performance spider chart
Radar chart comparing normalized performance and fuel-consumption scores.
| Vehicle | Power | Acceleration | Top speed |
|---|---|---|---|
| MiniHatch (F56)Cooper SD 2.0 | 170 hp 127 kW | 7.3 s | 227 km/h 141 mph |
| Abarth695XSR Yamaha 1.4 T-Jet | 165 hp 123 kW | 7.3 s | 217 km/h 135 mph |
Most attractive quadrant
Scatter chart with performance score on the X axis and practicality score on the Y axis.
| Vehicle | Performance score | Practicality score | ||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MiniHatch (F56)Cooper SD 2.0 |
|
| ||||||||||||||
| Abarth695XSR Yamaha 1.4 T-Jet |
|
| ||||||||||||||
Performance vs fuel economy
Cars closer to the top-right corner combine stronger performance with better fuel economy scores.
| Vehicle | Performance score | Fuel economy score | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MiniHatch (F56)Cooper SD 2.0 |
| 4.0 L/100 km 58.8 mpg US 70.6 mpg UK | ||||||
| Abarth695XSR Yamaha 1.4 T-Jet |
| 6.0 L/100 km 39.2 mpg US 47.1 mpg UK | ||||||
Mini Hatch (F56) Cooper SD 2.0 is closest to the top-right balance target for performance and fuel economy.
Acceleration vs fuel consumption
Cars closer to the lower-left corner offer a better mix of quick acceleration and low fuel consumption.
| Vehicle | Fuel consumption, L/100 km | 0-100 km/h, s |
|---|---|---|
| MiniHatch (F56)Cooper SD 2.0 | 4.0 L/100 km 58.8 mpg US 70.6 mpg UK | 7.3 s |
| Abarth695XSR Yamaha 1.4 T-Jet | 6.0 L/100 km 39.2 mpg US 47.1 mpg UK | 7.3 s |
Power-to-weight vs fuel consumption
The shaded area favors higher power-to-weight with lower combined fuel consumption.
| Vehicle | Power-to-weight, hp/t | Fuel consumption, L/100 km |
|---|---|---|
| MiniHatch (F56)Cooper SD 2.0 | 145 hp/t 108 kW/t 6.9 kg/hp | 4.0 L/100 km 58.8 mpg US 70.6 mpg UK |
| Abarth695XSR Yamaha 1.4 T-Jet | 149 hp/t 111 kW/t 6.7 kg/hp | 6.0 L/100 km 39.2 mpg US 47.1 mpg UK |
Detailed score breakdown
| Vehicle | MiniHatch (F56)Cooper SD 2.0 | Abarth695XSR Yamaha 1.4 T-Jet | ||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power | 170 hp 127 kW | 165 hp 123 kW | ||||||||||||||||
| Torque | 360 Nm 266 lb-ft | 230 Nm 170 lb-ft | ||||||||||||||||
| Acceleration | 7.3 s | 7.3 s | ||||||||||||||||
| Top speed | 227 km/h 141 mph | 217 km/h 135 mph | ||||||||||||||||
| Lightness | 1,175 kg 2,590 lb | 1,110 kg 2,447 lb | ||||||||||||||||
| Fuel consumption | 4.0 L/100 km 58.8 mpg US 70.6 mpg UK | 6.0 L/100 km 39.2 mpg US 47.1 mpg UK | ||||||||||||||||
| Practicality |
|
| ||||||||||||||||
| Range score | 1,100 km 684 mi | 583 km 362 mi | ||||||||||||||||
| CO2 score | 106 g/km | 139 g/km | ||||||||||||||||
| Trunk score | 211 L 7.5 cu ft | 185 L 6.5 cu ft | ||||||||||||||||
| Power-to-weight score | 145 hp/t 108 kW/t 6.9 kg/hp | 149 hp/t 111 kW/t 6.7 kg/hp | ||||||||||||||||
| Overall | Fixed score | Fixed score |
Fuel cost and annual usage
Estimate running costs from combined consumption, your annual distance, and the fuel price in your local currency.
Enter the fuel price in your local currency, for example €/L, $/gal, £/L or any other local currency.
LC = Local Currency
| Vehicle | Mini Hatch (F56) Cooper SD 2.0 | Abarth 695 XSR Yamaha 1.4 T-Jet |
|---|---|---|
| Consumption | 4 L/100 km58.8 mpg US70.6 mpg UK | 6 L/100 km39.2 mpg US47.1 mpg UK |
| Cost / 100 km | 7.00 LC100 km | 10.50 LC100 km |
| Cost / 100 mi | 11.27 LC100 mi | 16.90 LC100 mi |
| Annual fuel used | 600 L159 US gal132 UK gal | 900 L238 US gal198 UK gal |
| Annual fuel cost | 1,050 LC/year | 1,575 LC/year |
Head-to-head comparisons
Mini Hatch (F56) Cooper SD 2.0
- Has 5 hp more
- Has 130 Nm more
- Has 10 km/h (6 mph) higher top speed
- Uses 2.0 L/100 km less fuel
- Has 517 km (321 mi) more estimated range
- Has 26 L more trunk volume
- Emits 33 g/km less CO2
Pros
- Quickest 0-100 km/h in this comparison
- Highest top speed
- Most powerful
- Highest torque
- Lowest combined fuel consumption
- Best estimated range
- Largest trunk
Cons
- Heaviest
Abarth 695 XSR Yamaha 1.4 T-Jet
- Is 65 kg lighter
- Has 4 hp/t better power-to-weight
Pros
- Lightest
- Best power-to-weight ratio
Cons
- Lowest power
- Highest combined fuel consumption
- Lowest top speed
- Smallest trunk
- Highest CO2 emissions
Choose cars to compare
Popular comparisons























