Car comparison

Lynk & Co 900 EM-P 2.0TvsMini Aceman (J05) JCW 54.2 kWh

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

New comparison

Lynk & Co 900

EM-P 2.0T

254 hp1969 ccHybridAWDAutomaticTurbochargedSUV2025-present
VS

Mini Aceman (J05)

JCW 54.2 kWh

258 hpElectricFWDAutomaticSUV2025-present

Comparison overview

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

Best choices

Lynk & Co 900 EM-P 2.0T

  • Quickest 0-100 km/h
    4.3 s
  • Fastest top speed
    240 km/h
    149 mph
  • Highest torque
    350 Nm
    258 lb-ft
  • Best overall score
    65/100
  • Best performance score
    59/100
  • Best economy score
    87/100
  • Best practicality score
    78/100

Specification comparison

Specification comparison
ModelLynk & Co900EM-P 2.0TMiniAceman (J05)JCW 54.2 kWh
Power
254hp189kW
258hp192kW
Torque
350Nm258lb-ft
350Nm258lb-ft
Curb weight
2,820kg6,217lb
1,750kg3,858lb
Gross weight-
2,355kg5,192lb
Top speed
240 km/h
149 mph
Unrestricted
210 km/h130 mph
Restricted
200 km/h124 mph
Calculated
To 99% top speed
68.5s99% target: 238 km/h / 148 mph
Calculated
56.8s99% target: 208 km/h / 129 mph
Calculated
0-100 km/h
4.3s
6.4s
0-200 km/h
20.3s
Calculated
35.9s
Calculated
0-60 mph
4.1s
Calculated
6.1s
Calculated
Fuel consumption
7.3L/100 km32.3mpg US38.7mpg UK
-
Quarter mile
12.7s
Calculated
14.6s
Calculated
Power-to-weight
90hp/t67kW/t41hp/1000 lb
Calculated
147hp/t110kW/t67hp/1000 lb
Calculated
Torque-to-weight
124Nm/t83lb-ft/ton
Calculated
200Nm/t134lb-ft/ton
Calculated
Estimated range
892km554mi
Calculated
-
Displacement
1,969cc120cu in
-
Length
5,240mm206in
4,079mm161in
Width
1,999mm79in
1,754mm69in
Height
1,810mm71in
1,514mm60in
Wheelbase
3,160mm124in
2,606mm103in
Front track
1,722mm68in
1,519mm60in
Rear track
1,724mm68in
1,515mm60in
Ground clearance
194mm8in
143mm6in
Trunk volume
281L
300L
Max trunk volume
1,050L
1,005L
Doors
5
5
Seats
6
5
Fuel tank
65L
-

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.

Lynk & Co 900 EM-P 2.0TMini Aceman (J05) JCW 54.2 kWhPowerTorque
  • Lynk & Co 900 EM-P 2.0T: Power / Torque
  • Mini Aceman (J05) JCW 54.2 kWh: Power / Torque
Dyno simulation data table
VehiclePeak power RPMPeak torque RPMMax engine speed
Lynk & Co900EM-P 2.0T5,500 rpm1,800-4,800 rpm5,750 rpm
MiniAceman (J05)JCW 54.2 kWh5,000 rpm50-5,000 rpm5,250 rpm

Acceleration curve

Estimated speed over time for selected vehicles.

Acceleration and drag-race table
MetricLynk & Co900EM-P 2.0TMiniAceman (J05)JCW 54.2 kWh
Acceleration checkpoints
0-60 mph
0-97 km/h
4.1 s
6.1 s
0-100 km/h
0-62 mph
4.3 s
6.4 s
0-200 km/h
0-124 mph
20.3 s
35.9 s
Top speed
240 km/h
149 mph
Unrestricted
210 km/h130 mph
Restricted
200 km/h124 mph
Likely limited
Drag race simulation
60 ft
18 m
1.9 s
2.4 s
330 ft
101 m
5.2 s
6.3 s
1/8 mile
201 m
8.1 s
9.5 s
1000 ft
305 m
10.6 s
12.2 s
1/4 mile
402 m
12.7 s
14.6 s
Trap speed
1/4 mile
402 m
171 km/h
106 mph
156 km/h
97 mph

Power comparison

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

Chart data table
VehicleValue
Lynk & Co900EM-P 2.0T
254 hp
189 kW
MiniAceman (J05)JCW 54.2 kWh
258 hp
192 kW

Mini Aceman (J05) JCW 54.2 kWh has 4 hp more than Lynk & Co 900 EM-P 2.0T.

The biggest power difference is between Lynk & Co 900 EM-P 2.0T and Mini Aceman (J05) JCW 54.2 kWh: 4 hp (3 kW).

Torque comparison

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

Chart data table
VehicleValue
Lynk & Co900EM-P 2.0T
350 Nm
258 lb-ft
MiniAceman (J05)JCW 54.2 kWh
350 Nm
258 lb-ft

Curb weight comparison

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

Chart data table
VehicleValue
Lynk & Co900EM-P 2.0T
2,820 kg
6,217 lb
MiniAceman (J05)JCW 54.2 kWh
1,750 kg
3,858 lb

Top speed without limiter comparison

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

Chart data table
VehicleValue
Lynk & Co900EM-P 2.0T
240 km/h
149 mph
MiniAceman (J05)JCW 54.2 kWh
Unrestricted
210 km/h130 mph
Restricted
200 km/h124 mph

0-100 km/h comparison

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

Chart data table
VehicleValue
Lynk & Co900EM-P 2.0T4.3 s
MiniAceman (J05)JCW 54.2 kWh6.4 s

Although Mini Aceman (J05) JCW 54.2 kWh has more power, Lynk & Co 900 EM-P 2.0T is quicker from 0-100 km/h.

The biggest 0-100 km/h difference is between Lynk & Co 900 EM-P 2.0T and Mini Aceman (J05) JCW 54.2 kWh: 2.1 s.

Power-to-weight comparison

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

Chart data table
VehicleValue
Lynk & Co900EM-P 2.0T
90 hp/t
67 kW/t
11.1 kg/hp
MiniAceman (J05)JCW 54.2 kWh
147 hp/t
110 kW/t
6.8 kg/hp

Performance spider chart

Radar chart comparing normalized performance and fuel-consumption scores.

Chart data table
VehiclePowerAccelerationTop speed
Lynk & Co900EM-P 2.0T
254 hp
189 kW
4.3 s
240 km/h
149 mph
MiniAceman (J05)JCW 54.2 kWh
258 hp
192 kW
6.4 s
Unrestricted
210 km/h130 mph
Restricted
200 km/h124 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
Lynk & Co900EM-P 2.0T
Power
254 hp
189 kW
0-100 km/h4.3 s
Top speed
240 km/h
149 mph
Doors/seats
5 doors
6 seats
Trunk
281 L
9.9 cu ft
Length
5,240 mm
206.3 in
Height
1,810 mm
71.3 in
MiniAceman (J05)JCW 54.2 kWh
Power
258 hp
192 kW
0-100 km/h6.4 s
Top speed
Unrestricted
210 km/h130 mph
Restricted
200 km/h124 mph
Doors/seats
5 doors
5 seats
Trunk
300 L
10.6 cu ft
Length
4,079 mm
160.6 in
Height
1,514 mm
59.6 in

Detailed score breakdown

Detailed score breakdown
VehicleLynk & Co900EM-P 2.0TMiniAceman (J05)JCW 54.2 kWh
Power
254 hp
189 kW
258 hp
192 kW
Torque
350 Nm
258 lb-ft
350 Nm
258 lb-ft
Acceleration
4.3 s
6.4 s
Top speed
240 km/h
149 mph
Unrestricted
210 km/h130 mph
Restricted
200 km/h124 mph
Lightness
2,820 kg
6,217 lb
1,750 kg
3,858 lb
Fuel consumption
7.3 L/100 km
32.3 mpg US
38.7 mpg UK
-
Practicality
Doors/seats
5 doors
6 seats
Trunk
281 L
9.9 cu ft
Length
5,240 mm
206.3 in
Height
1,810 mm
71.3 in
Doors/seats
5 doors
5 seats
Trunk
300 L
10.6 cu ft
Length
4,079 mm
160.6 in
Height
1,514 mm
59.6 in
Range score
892 km
554 mi
-
Trunk score
281 L
9.9 cu ft
300 L
10.6 cu ft
Power-to-weight score
90 hp/t
67 kW/t
11.1 kg/hp
147 hp/t
110 kW/t
6.8 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
VehicleLynk & Co 900 EM-P 2.0T
Consumption7.3 L/100 km32.3 mpg US38.7 mpg UK
Cost / 100 km12.76 LC100 km
Cost / 100 mi20.53 LC100 mi
Annual fuel used1,094 L289 US gal241 UK gal
Annual fuel cost1,914 LC/year

Head-to-head comparisons

Lynk & Co 900 EM-P 2.0T

  • Is 2.1 s quicker from 0-100 km/h
  • Has 30 km/h (19 mph) higher top speed

Pros

  • Quickest 0-100 km/h in this comparison
  • Highest top speed
  • Highest torque

Cons

  • Lowest power
  • Heaviest
  • Smallest trunk

Mini Aceman (J05) JCW 54.2 kWh

  • Has 4 hp more
  • Is 1,070 kg lighter
  • Has 57 hp/t better power-to-weight
  • Has 19 L more trunk volume

Pros

  • Most powerful
  • Lightest
  • Best power-to-weight ratio
  • Largest trunk

Cons

  • Slowest 0-100 km/h
  • Lowest top speed

Choose cars to compare

Brand
Model
Generation
Engine or modification
Lynk & Co 900 EM-P 2.0T
Mini Aceman (J05) JCW 54.2 kWh
Compare selected cars
2 vehicles selected

Popular comparisons

EM-P 2.0T
45 TFSI
VS
Lynk & Co900EM-P 2.0TvsAUDIQ3 II (F3)45 TFSI
JCW 54.2 kWh
S 2.0
VS
MiniAceman (J05)JCW 54.2 kWhvsMiniCountryman (U25)S 2.0
EM-P 2.0T
2.0
VS
Lynk & Co900EM-P 2.0TvsMaseratiGrecaleFacelift 20262.0
JCW 54.2 kWh
2.0 TFSI
VS
MiniAceman (J05)JCW 54.2 kWhvsAUDIQ5 III (GU)2.0 TFSI
EM-P 2.0T
EQE 300 100 kWh
VS
Lynk & Co900EM-P 2.0TvsMercedes-BenzEQE SUV (X294)EQE 300 100 kWh
EM-P 2.0T
2.0 TSI
VS
Lynk & Co900EM-P 2.0TvsVolkswagenTayron II2.0 TSI
JCW 54.2 kWh
450TSI
VS
MiniAceman (J05)JCW 54.2 kWhvsVolkswagenTeramont Pro450TSI
EM-P 2.0T
2.0 TSI
VS
Lynk & Co900EM-P 2.0TvsVolkswagenTiguan III2.0 TSI
JCW 54.2 kWh
Turismo 54 kWh
VS
MiniAceman (J05)JCW 54.2 kWhvsAbarth600eTurismo 54 kWh
EM-P 2.0T
2.0 TSI
VS
Lynk & Co900EM-P 2.0TvsCupraTerramar2.0 TSI
JCW 54.2 kWh
GLB 250+ 85 kWh
VS
MiniAceman (J05)JCW 54.2 kWhvsMercedes-BenzGLB (X244)GLB 250+ 85 kWh
EM-P 2.0T
3.3 e-Skyactiv D
VS
Lynk & Co900EM-P 2.0TvsMazdaCX-803.3 e-Skyactiv D
Lynk & Co 900 EM-P 2.0T vs Mini Aceman (J05) JCW 54.2 kWh - car comparison - FastVsFaster