Mercedes-Benz GLA (X156)
Car comparison
Mercedes-Benz GLA (X156) GLA 200vsMini Countryman (F60) Cooper D 2.0
Compare specs, acceleration, fuel consumption, dimensions, practicality, and estimated running costs side by side.
New comparisonMini Countryman (F60)
Cooper D 2.0
Comparison overview
Use the estimates as comparison hints and verify exact figures before making decisions.
Best choices
Mini Countryman (F60) Cooper D 2.0
- Highest torque330 Nm243 lb-ft
- Lowest combined fuel consumption4.5 L/100 km52.3 mpg US62.8 mpg UK
- Lowest city consumption4.9 L/100 km48.0 mpg US57.6 mpg UK
- Lowest highway consumption4.2 L/100 km56.0 mpg US67.3 mpg UK
- Best estimated range1,133 km704 mi
- Largest trunk450 L
- Best economy score95/100
- Best practicality score81/100
Mercedes-Benz GLA (X156) GLA 200
- Quickest 0-100 km/h8.9 s
- Fastest top speed215 km/h134 mph
- Most powerful156 hp116 kW
- Lightest1,320 kg2,910 lb
- Best power-to-weight118 hp/t88 kW/t8.5 kg/hp
- Best overall score55/100
- Best performance score43/100
Specification comparison
| Model | Mercedes-BenzGLA (X156)GLA 200 | MiniCountryman (F60)Cooper D 2.0 |
|---|---|---|
| Power | 156hp116kW | 150hp112kW |
| Torque | 250Nm184lb-ft | 330Nm243lb-ft |
| Curb weight | 1,320kg2,910lb | 1,405kg3,097lb |
| Gross weight | 1,920kg4,233lb | 2,000kg4,409lb |
| Top speed | 215 km/h 134 mph | 208 km/h 129 mph |
| To 99% top speed | 85.1s99% target: 213 km/h / 132 mph Calculated | 84.7s99% target: 206 km/h / 128 mph Calculated |
| 0-100 km/h | 8.9s | 8.9s |
| 0-200 km/h | 45.8s Calculated | 56.8s Calculated |
| 0-60 mph | 8.4s Calculated | 8.4s Calculated |
| Fuel consumption | 5.9L/100 km39.9mpg US47.9mpg UK | 4.5L/100 km52.3mpg US62.8mpg UK |
| Fuel consumption city | 7.9L/100 km29.8mpg US35.8mpg UK | 4.9L/100 km48mpg US57.6mpg UK |
| Fuel consumption highway | 4.8L/100 km49mpg US58.9mpg UK | 4.2L/100 km56mpg US67.3mpg UK |
| Quarter mile | 16.5s Calculated | 16.5s Calculated |
| Power-to-weight | 118hp/t88kW/t54hp/1000 lb Calculated | 107hp/t80kW/t48hp/1000 lb Calculated |
| Torque-to-weight | 189Nm/t127lb-ft/ton Calculated | 235Nm/t157lb-ft/ton Calculated |
| Estimated range | 847km527mi Calculated | 1,133km704mi Calculated |
| Displacement | 1,595cc97cu in | 1,995cc122cu in |
| Length | 4,417mm174in | 4,299mm169in |
| Width | 1,804mm71in | 1,822mm72in |
| Height | 1,494mm59in | 1,557mm61in |
| Wheelbase | 2,699mm106in | 2,670mm105in |
| Front track | 1,569mm62in | 1,585mm62in |
| Rear track | 1,560mm61in | 1,587mm62in |
| Ground clearance | - | 165mm6in |
| Trunk volume | 421L | 450L |
| Max trunk volume | 1,235L | 1,390L |
| Doors | 5 | 5 |
| Seats | 5 | 5 |
| Fuel tank | 50L | 51L |
| CO2 emissions | - | 118g/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.
- Mercedes-Benz GLA (X156) GLA 200: Power / Torque
- Mini Countryman (F60) Cooper D 2.0: Power / Torque
| Vehicle | Peak power RPM | Peak torque RPM | Max engine speed |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mercedes-BenzGLA (X156)GLA 200 | 5,300 rpm | 1,250-4,000 rpm | 5,550 rpm |
| MiniCountryman (F60)Cooper D 2.0 | 4,000 rpm | 1,750-2,500 rpm | 4,250 rpm |
Acceleration curve
Estimated speed over time for selected vehicles.
| Metric | Mercedes-BenzGLA (X156)GLA 200 | MiniCountryman (F60)Cooper D 2.0 |
|---|---|---|
| Acceleration checkpoints | ||
0-60 mph 0-97 km/h | 8.4 s | 8.4 s |
0-100 km/h 0-62 mph | 8.9 s | 8.9 s |
0-200 km/h 0-124 mph | 45.8 s | 56.8 s |
| Top speed | 215 km/h 134 mph | 208 km/h 129 mph |
| Drag race simulation | ||
60 ft 18 m | 2.8 s | 2.7 s |
330 ft 101 m | 7.2 s | 7.2 s |
1/8 mile 201 m | 10.8 s | 10.8 s |
1000 ft 305 m | 13.9 s | 13.9 s |
1/4 mile 402 m | 16.5 s | 16.5 s |
Trap speed 1/4 mile 402 m | 142 km/h 88 mph | 140 km/h 87 mph |
Power comparison
Bar comparison chart for Power. Higher is better · hp / kW
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| Mercedes-BenzGLA (X156)GLA 200 | 156 hp 116 kW |
| MiniCountryman (F60)Cooper D 2.0 | 150 hp 112 kW |
Mercedes-Benz GLA (X156) GLA 200 has 6 hp more than Mini Countryman (F60) Cooper D 2.0.
The biggest power difference is between Mini Countryman (F60) Cooper D 2.0 and Mercedes-Benz GLA (X156) GLA 200: 6 hp (4 kW).
Torque comparison
Bar comparison chart for Torque. Higher is better · Nm / lb-ft
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| Mercedes-BenzGLA (X156)GLA 200 | 250 Nm 184 lb-ft |
| MiniCountryman (F60)Cooper D 2.0 | 330 Nm 243 lb-ft |
Curb weight comparison
Bar comparison chart for Curb weight. Lower is better · kg / lb
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| Mercedes-BenzGLA (X156)GLA 200 | 1,320 kg 2,910 lb |
| MiniCountryman (F60)Cooper D 2.0 | 1,405 kg 3,097 lb |
Top speed without limiter comparison
Bar comparison chart for Top speed without limiter. Higher is better · km/h / mph
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| Mercedes-BenzGLA (X156)GLA 200 | 215 km/h 134 mph |
| MiniCountryman (F60)Cooper D 2.0 | 208 km/h 129 mph |
0-100 km/h comparison
Bar comparison chart for 0-100 km/h. Lower is better · seconds
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| Mercedes-BenzGLA (X156)GLA 200 | 8.9 s |
| MiniCountryman (F60)Cooper D 2.0 | 8.9 s |
Fuel consumption comparison
Bar comparison chart for Fuel consumption. Lower is better · L/100 km / mpg US / mpg UK
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| Mercedes-BenzGLA (X156)GLA 200 | 5.9 L/100 km 39.9 mpg US 47.9 mpg UK |
| MiniCountryman (F60)Cooper D 2.0 | 4.5 L/100 km 52.3 mpg US 62.8 mpg UK |
The biggest fuel consumption difference is between Mini Countryman (F60) Cooper D 2.0 and Mercedes-Benz GLA (X156) GLA 200: 1.4 L/100 km.
Power-to-weight comparison
Bar comparison chart for Power-to-weight. Higher is better · hp/t / kW/t
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| Mercedes-BenzGLA (X156)GLA 200 | 118 hp/t 88 kW/t 8.5 kg/hp |
| MiniCountryman (F60)Cooper D 2.0 | 107 hp/t 80 kW/t 9.4 kg/hp |
Estimated range comparison
Bar comparison chart for Estimated range. Higher is better · km / mi
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| Mercedes-BenzGLA (X156)GLA 200 | 847 km 527 mi |
| MiniCountryman (F60)Cooper D 2.0 | 1,133 km 704 mi |
Performance spider chart
Radar chart comparing normalized performance and fuel-consumption scores.
| Vehicle | Power | Acceleration | Top speed |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mercedes-BenzGLA (X156)GLA 200 | 156 hp 116 kW | 8.9 s | 215 km/h 134 mph |
| MiniCountryman (F60)Cooper D 2.0 | 150 hp 112 kW | 8.9 s | 208 km/h 129 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 | ||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mercedes-BenzGLA (X156)GLA 200 |
|
| ||||||||||||||
| MiniCountryman (F60)Cooper D 2.0 |
|
| ||||||||||||||
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 | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mercedes-BenzGLA (X156)GLA 200 |
| 5.9 L/100 km 39.9 mpg US 47.9 mpg UK | ||||||
| MiniCountryman (F60)Cooper D 2.0 |
| 4.5 L/100 km 52.3 mpg US 62.8 mpg UK | ||||||
Mini Countryman (F60) Cooper D 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 |
|---|---|---|
| Mercedes-BenzGLA (X156)GLA 200 | 5.9 L/100 km 39.9 mpg US 47.9 mpg UK | 8.9 s |
| MiniCountryman (F60)Cooper D 2.0 | 4.5 L/100 km 52.3 mpg US 62.8 mpg UK | 8.9 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 |
|---|---|---|
| Mercedes-BenzGLA (X156)GLA 200 | 118 hp/t 88 kW/t 8.5 kg/hp | 5.9 L/100 km 39.9 mpg US 47.9 mpg UK |
| MiniCountryman (F60)Cooper D 2.0 | 107 hp/t 80 kW/t 9.4 kg/hp | 4.5 L/100 km 52.3 mpg US 62.8 mpg UK |
Detailed score breakdown
| Vehicle | Mercedes-BenzGLA (X156)GLA 200 | MiniCountryman (F60)Cooper D 2.0 | ||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power | 156 hp 116 kW | 150 hp 112 kW | ||||||||||||||||
| Torque | 250 Nm 184 lb-ft | 330 Nm 243 lb-ft | ||||||||||||||||
| Acceleration | 8.9 s | 8.9 s | ||||||||||||||||
| Top speed | 215 km/h 134 mph | 208 km/h 129 mph | ||||||||||||||||
| Lightness | 1,320 kg 2,910 lb | 1,405 kg 3,097 lb | ||||||||||||||||
| Fuel consumption | 5.9 L/100 km 39.9 mpg US 47.9 mpg UK | 4.5 L/100 km 52.3 mpg US 62.8 mpg UK | ||||||||||||||||
| Practicality |
|
| ||||||||||||||||
| Range score | 847 km 527 mi | 1,133 km 704 mi | ||||||||||||||||
| CO2 score | - | 118 g/km | ||||||||||||||||
| Trunk score | 421 L 14.9 cu ft | 450 L 15.9 cu ft | ||||||||||||||||
| Power-to-weight score | 118 hp/t 88 kW/t 8.5 kg/hp | 107 hp/t 80 kW/t 9.4 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 | Mercedes-Benz GLA (X156) GLA 200 | Mini Countryman (F60) Cooper D 2.0 |
|---|---|---|
| Consumption | 5.9 L/100 km39.9 mpg US47.9 mpg UK | 4.5 L/100 km52.3 mpg US62.8 mpg UK |
| Cost / 100 km | 10.33 LC100 km | 7.88 LC100 km |
| Cost / 100 mi | 16.62 LC100 mi | 12.67 LC100 mi |
| Annual fuel used | 885 L234 US gal195 UK gal | 675 L178 US gal148 UK gal |
| Annual fuel cost | 1,549 LC/year | 1,181 LC/year |
Head-to-head comparisons
Mercedes-Benz GLA (X156) GLA 200
- Has 6 hp more
- Is 85 kg lighter
- Has 7 km/h (4 mph) higher top speed
- Has 11 hp/t better power-to-weight
Pros
- Quickest 0-100 km/h in this comparison
- Highest top speed
- Most powerful
- Lightest
- Best power-to-weight ratio
Cons
- Highest combined fuel consumption
- Smallest trunk
Mini Countryman (F60) Cooper D 2.0
- Has 80 Nm more
- Uses 1.4 L/100 km less fuel
- Has 286 km (178 mi) more estimated range
- Has 29 L more trunk volume
Pros
- Highest torque
- Lowest combined fuel consumption
- Best estimated range
- Largest trunk
Cons
- Lowest power
- Heaviest
- Lowest top speed
Choose cars to compare
Popular comparisons























