Car comparison

Ford Puma 1.0 EcoBoostvsMini Countryman (F60) Cooper D 2.0

Compare specs, acceleration, fuel consumption, dimensions, practicality, and estimated running costs side by side.

New comparison

Ford Puma

1.0 EcoBoost

155 hpGasolineFWDManualTurbochargedSUV2019-2020
VS

Mini Countryman (F60)

Cooper D 2.0

150 hp1995 ccDieselAWDManualTurbochargedSUV2018-2020

Comparison overview

Use the estimates as comparison hints and verify exact figures before making decisions.

Best choices

Ford Puma 1.0 EcoBoost

  • Quickest 0-100 km/h
    9.0 s
  • Fastest top speed
    210 km/h
    130 mph Unrestricted
    200 km/h
    124 mph Restricted
  • Most powerful
    155 hp
    116 kW
  • Lightest
    1,205 kg
    2,657 lb
  • Best power-to-weight
    129 hp/t
    96 kW/t
    7.8 kg/hp
  • Lowest combined fuel consumption
    4.5 L/100 km
    52.3 mpg US
    62.8 mpg UK
  • Lowest city consumption
    5.1 L/100 km
    46.1 mpg US
    55.4 mpg UK
  • Lowest highway consumption
    4.1 L/100 km
    57.4 mpg US
    68.9 mpg UK
  • Lowest CO2 emissions
    101 g/km
  • Largest trunk
    468 L
  • Best overall score
    55/100
  • Best performance score
    42/100
  • Best economy score
    95/100
  • Best practicality score
    82/100

Specification comparison

Specification comparison
ModelFordPuma1.0 EcoBoostMiniCountryman (F60)Cooper D 2.0
Power
155hp116kW
150hp112kW
Torque
240Nm177lb-ft
350Nm258lb-ft
Curb weight
1,205kg2,657lb
1,530kg3,373lb
Gross weight
1,765kg3,891lb
2,125kg4,685lb
Top speed
Unrestricted
210 km/h130 mph
Restricted
200 km/h124 mph
Calculated
205 km/h
127 mph
To 99% top speed
82.4s99% target: 208 km/h / 129 mph
Calculated
86.9s99% target: 203 km/h / 126 mph
Calculated
0-100 km/h
9.0s
9.0s
0-200 km/h
51.7s
Calculated
67.5s
Calculated
0-60 mph
8.5s
Calculated
8.5s
Calculated
Fuel consumption
4.5L/100 km52.3mpg US62.8mpg UK
4.9L/100 km48mpg US57.6mpg UK
Fuel consumption city
5.1L/100 km46.1mpg US55.4mpg UK
5.7L/100 km41.3mpg US49.6mpg UK
Fuel consumption highway
4.1L/100 km57.4mpg US68.9mpg UK
4.4L/100 km53.5mpg US64.2mpg UK
Quarter mile
16.5s
Calculated
16.5s
Calculated
Power-to-weight
129hp/t96kW/t58hp/1000 lb
Calculated
98hp/t73kW/t44hp/1000 lb
Calculated
Torque-to-weight
199Nm/t133lb-ft/ton
Calculated
229Nm/t153lb-ft/ton
Calculated
Estimated range
933km580mi
Calculated
1,041km647mi
Calculated
Displacement-
1,995cc122cu in
Length
4,207mm166in
4,299mm169in
Width
1,805mm71in
1,822mm72in
Height
1,538mm61in
1,557mm61in
Wheelbase
2,588mm102in
2,670mm105in
Front track-
1,585mm62in
Rear track-
1,587mm62in
Ground clearance-
165mm6in
Trunk volume
468L
450L
Max trunk volume
1,161L
1,390L
Doors
5
5
Seats
5
5
Fuel tank
42L
51L
CO2 emissions
101g/km
128g/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.

Ford Puma 1.0 EcoBoostMini Countryman (F60) Cooper D 2.0PowerTorque
  • Ford Puma 1.0 EcoBoost: Power / Torque
  • Mini Countryman (F60) Cooper D 2.0: Power / Torque
Dyno simulation data table
VehiclePeak power RPMPeak torque RPMMax engine speed
FordPuma1.0 EcoBoost6,000 rpm1,750 rpm6,250 rpm
MiniCountryman (F60)Cooper D 2.04,000 rpm1,750-2,500 rpm4,250 rpm

Acceleration curve

Estimated speed over time for selected vehicles.

Acceleration and drag-race table
MetricFordPuma1.0 EcoBoostMiniCountryman (F60)Cooper D 2.0
Acceleration checkpoints
0-60 mph
0-97 km/h
8.5 s
8.5 s
0-100 km/h
0-62 mph
9.0 s
9.0 s
0-200 km/h
0-124 mph
51.7 s
67.5 s
Top speed
Unrestricted
210 km/h130 mph
Restricted
200 km/h124 mph
Likely limited
205 km/h
127 mph
Drag race simulation
60 ft
18 m
2.8 s
2.7 s
330 ft
101 m
7.3 s
7.1 s
1/8 mile
201 m
10.9 s
10.8 s
1000 ft
305 m
14.0 s
13.9 s
1/4 mile
402 m
16.5 s
16.5 s
Trap speed
1/4 mile
402 m
141 km/h
87 mph
138 km/h
86 mph

Power comparison

Bar comparison chart for Power. Higher is better · hp / kW

Chart data table
VehicleValue
FordPuma1.0 EcoBoost
155 hp
116 kW
MiniCountryman (F60)Cooper D 2.0
150 hp
112 kW

Ford Puma 1.0 EcoBoost has 5 hp more than Mini Countryman (F60) Cooper D 2.0.

The biggest power difference is between Mini Countryman (F60) Cooper D 2.0 and Ford Puma 1.0 EcoBoost: 5 hp (4 kW).

Torque comparison

Bar comparison chart for Torque. Higher is better · Nm / lb-ft

Chart data table
VehicleValue
FordPuma1.0 EcoBoost
240 Nm
177 lb-ft
MiniCountryman (F60)Cooper D 2.0
350 Nm
258 lb-ft

Curb weight comparison

Bar comparison chart for Curb weight. Lower is better · kg / lb

Chart data table
VehicleValue
FordPuma1.0 EcoBoost
1,205 kg
2,657 lb
MiniCountryman (F60)Cooper D 2.0
1,530 kg
3,373 lb

Top speed without limiter comparison

Bar comparison chart for Top speed without limiter. Higher is better · km/h / mph

Chart data table
VehicleValue
FordPuma1.0 EcoBoost
Unrestricted
210 km/h130 mph
Restricted
200 km/h124 mph
MiniCountryman (F60)Cooper D 2.0
205 km/h
127 mph

0-100 km/h comparison

Bar comparison chart for 0-100 km/h. Lower is better · seconds

Chart data table
VehicleValue
FordPuma1.0 EcoBoost9.0 s
MiniCountryman (F60)Cooper D 2.09.0 s

Fuel consumption comparison

Bar comparison chart for Fuel consumption. Lower is better · L/100 km / mpg US / mpg UK

Chart data table
VehicleValue
FordPuma1.0 EcoBoost
4.5 L/100 km
52.3 mpg US
62.8 mpg UK
MiniCountryman (F60)Cooper D 2.0
4.9 L/100 km
48.0 mpg US
57.6 mpg UK

Power-to-weight comparison

Bar comparison chart for Power-to-weight. Higher is better · hp/t / kW/t

Chart data table
VehicleValue
FordPuma1.0 EcoBoost
129 hp/t
96 kW/t
7.8 kg/hp
MiniCountryman (F60)Cooper D 2.0
98 hp/t
73 kW/t
10.2 kg/hp

Estimated range comparison

Bar comparison chart for Estimated range. Higher is better · km / mi

Chart data table
VehicleValue
FordPuma1.0 EcoBoost
933 km
580 mi
MiniCountryman (F60)Cooper D 2.0
1,041 km
647 mi

Performance spider chart

Radar chart comparing normalized performance and fuel-consumption scores.

Chart data table
VehiclePowerAccelerationTop speed
FordPuma1.0 EcoBoost
155 hp
116 kW
9.0 s
Unrestricted
210 km/h130 mph
Restricted
200 km/h124 mph
MiniCountryman (F60)Cooper D 2.0
150 hp
112 kW
9.0 s
205 km/h
127 mph

Most attractive quadrant

Scatter chart with performance score on the X axis and practicality score on the Y axis.

Chart data table
VehiclePerformance scorePracticality score
FordPuma1.0 EcoBoost
Power
155 hp
116 kW
0-100 km/h9.0 s
Top speed
Unrestricted
210 km/h130 mph
Restricted
200 km/h124 mph
Doors/seats
5 doors
5 seats
Trunk
468 L
16.5 cu ft
Length
4,207 mm
165.6 in
Height
1,538 mm
60.6 in
MiniCountryman (F60)Cooper D 2.0
Power
150 hp
112 kW
0-100 km/h9.0 s
Top speed
205 km/h
127 mph
Doors/seats
5 doors
5 seats
Trunk
450 L
15.9 cu ft
Length
4,299 mm
169.3 in
Height
1,557 mm
61.3 in

Performance vs fuel economy

Cars closer to the top-right corner combine stronger performance with better fuel economy scores.

Performance vs fuel economy data table
VehiclePerformance scoreFuel economy score
FordPuma1.0 EcoBoost
Power
155 hp
116 kW
0-100 km/h9.0 s
Top speed
Unrestricted
210 km/h130 mph
Restricted
200 km/h124 mph
4.5 L/100 km
52.3 mpg US
62.8 mpg UK
MiniCountryman (F60)Cooper D 2.0
Power
150 hp
112 kW
0-100 km/h9.0 s
Top speed
205 km/h
127 mph
4.9 L/100 km
48.0 mpg US
57.6 mpg UK

Ford Puma 1.0 EcoBoost 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.

Acceleration vs fuel consumption data table
VehicleFuel consumption, L/100 km0-100 km/h, s
FordPuma1.0 EcoBoost
4.5 L/100 km
52.3 mpg US
62.8 mpg UK
9.0 s
MiniCountryman (F60)Cooper D 2.0
4.9 L/100 km
48.0 mpg US
57.6 mpg UK
9.0 s

Power-to-weight vs fuel consumption

The shaded area favors higher power-to-weight with lower combined fuel consumption.

Power-to-weight vs fuel consumption data table
VehiclePower-to-weight, hp/tFuel consumption, L/100 km
FordPuma1.0 EcoBoost
129 hp/t
96 kW/t
7.8 kg/hp
4.5 L/100 km
52.3 mpg US
62.8 mpg UK
MiniCountryman (F60)Cooper D 2.0
98 hp/t
73 kW/t
10.2 kg/hp
4.9 L/100 km
48.0 mpg US
57.6 mpg UK

Detailed score breakdown

Detailed score breakdown
VehicleFordPuma1.0 EcoBoostMiniCountryman (F60)Cooper D 2.0
Power
155 hp
116 kW
150 hp
112 kW
Torque
240 Nm
177 lb-ft
350 Nm
258 lb-ft
Acceleration
9.0 s
9.0 s
Top speed
Unrestricted
210 km/h130 mph
Restricted
200 km/h124 mph
205 km/h
127 mph
Lightness
1,205 kg
2,657 lb
1,530 kg
3,373 lb
Fuel consumption
4.5 L/100 km
52.3 mpg US
62.8 mpg UK
4.9 L/100 km
48.0 mpg US
57.6 mpg UK
Practicality
Doors/seats
5 doors
5 seats
Trunk
468 L
16.5 cu ft
Length
4,207 mm
165.6 in
Height
1,538 mm
60.6 in
Doors/seats
5 doors
5 seats
Trunk
450 L
15.9 cu ft
Length
4,299 mm
169.3 in
Height
1,557 mm
61.3 in
Range score
933 km
580 mi
1,041 km
647 mi
CO2 score
101 g/km
128 g/km
Trunk score
468 L
16.5 cu ft
450 L
15.9 cu ft
Power-to-weight score
129 hp/t
96 kW/t
7.8 kg/hp
98 hp/t
73 kW/t
10.2 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

Fuel cost and annual usage
VehicleFord Puma 1.0 EcoBoostMini Countryman (F60) Cooper D 2.0
Consumption4.5 L/100 km52.3 mpg US62.8 mpg UK4.9 L/100 km48 mpg US57.6 mpg UK
Cost / 100 km7.88 LC100 km8.58 LC100 km
Cost / 100 mi12.67 LC100 mi13.80 LC100 mi
Annual fuel used675 L178 US gal148 UK gal735 L194 US gal162 UK gal
Annual fuel cost1,181 LC/year1,286 LC/year

Head-to-head comparisons

Ford Puma 1.0 EcoBoost

  • Has 5 hp more
  • Is 325 kg lighter
  • Has 5 km/h (3 mph) higher top speed
  • Uses 0.4 L/100 km less fuel
  • Has 31 hp/t better power-to-weight
  • Has 18 L more trunk volume
  • Emits 27 g/km less CO2

Pros

  • Quickest 0-100 km/h in this comparison
  • Highest top speed
  • Most powerful
  • Lightest
  • Lowest combined fuel consumption
  • Best power-to-weight ratio
  • Largest trunk

Mini Countryman (F60) Cooper D 2.0

  • Has 110 Nm more
  • Has 107 km (67 mi) more estimated range

Pros

  • Highest torque
  • Best estimated range

Cons

  • Lowest power
  • Highest combined fuel consumption
  • Heaviest
  • Lowest top speed
  • Smallest trunk
  • Highest CO2 emissions

Choose cars to compare

Brand
Model
Generation
Engine or modification
Ford Puma 1.0 EcoBoost
Mini Countryman (F60) Cooper D 2.0
Compare selected cars
2 vehicles selected

Popular comparisons

1.0 EcoBoost
1.0 EcoBoost
VS
FordPuma1.0 EcoBoostvsFordPumaFacelift 20241.0 EcoBoost
Cooper D 2.0
Cooper D 2.0
VS
MiniCountryman (F60)Cooper D 2.0vsMiniCountryman (F60)Facelift 2020Cooper D 2.0
1.0 EcoBoost
1.5 TSI
VS
FordPuma1.0 EcoBoostvsVolkswagenT-Cross1.5 TSI
Cooper D 2.0
C 1.5
VS
MiniCountryman (F60)Cooper D 2.0vsMiniCountryman (U25)C 1.5
1.0 EcoBoost
35 TFSI
VS
FordPuma1.0 EcoBoostvsAUDIQ2L35 TFSI
Cooper D 2.0
Cooper S 1.6
VS
MiniCountryman (F60)Cooper D 2.0vsMiniCountryman (R60)Facelift 2014Cooper S 1.6
1.0 EcoBoost
2.0 e-Skyactiv G
VS
FordPuma1.0 EcoBoostvsMazdaCX-302.0 e-Skyactiv G
Cooper D 2.0
Cooper S 1.6
VS
MiniCountryman (F60)Cooper D 2.0vsMiniCountryman (R60)Cooper S 1.6
1.0 EcoBoost
Cooper D 2.0
VS
FordPuma1.0 EcoBoostvsMiniCountryman (F60)Cooper D 2.0
Cooper D 2.0
2.0 TDI SCR
VS
MiniCountryman (F60)Cooper D 2.0vsVolkswagenT-Roc I2.0 TDI SCR
1.0 EcoBoost
1.2 PureTech
VS
FordPuma1.0 EcoBoostvsPeugeot2008 II1.2 PureTech
Cooper D 2.0
35 TDI
VS
MiniCountryman (F60)Cooper D 2.0vsAUDIQ235 TDI
Ford Puma 1.0 EcoBoost vs Mini Countryman (F60) Cooper D 2.0 - car comparison - FastVsFaster