Mini Countryman (F60)
Car comparison
Mini Countryman (F60) JCW 2.0vsVolkswagen Tiguan II 2.0 TSI
Compare specs, acceleration, fuel consumption, dimensions, practicality, and estimated running costs side by side.
New comparisonVolkswagen Tiguan II
2.0 TSI
Comparison overview
Use the estimates as comparison hints and verify exact figures before making decisions.
Best choices
Mini Countryman (F60) JCW 2.0
- Fastest top speed234 km/h145 mph
- Most powerful231 hp172 kW
- Highest torque350 Nm258 lb-ft
- Lightest1,555 kg3,428 lb
- Best power-to-weight149 hp/t111 kW/t6.7 kg/hp
- Lowest combined fuel consumption6.9 L/100 km34.1 mpg US40.9 mpg UK
- Lowest city consumption8.5 L/100 km27.7 mpg US33.2 mpg UK
- Lowest highway consumption6.0 L/100 km39.2 mpg US47.1 mpg UK
- Lowest CO2 emissions158 g/km
- Best economy score88/100
Volkswagen Tiguan II 2.0 TSI
- Quickest 0-100 km/h6.3 s
- Best estimated range779 km484 mi
- Largest trunk615 L
- Best overall score66/100
- Best performance score56/100
- Best practicality score88/100
Specification comparison
| Model | MiniCountryman (F60)JCW 2.0 | VolkswagenTiguan II2.0 TSI |
|---|---|---|
| Power | 231hp172kW | 230hp172kW |
| Torque | 350Nm258lb-ft | 350Nm258lb-ft |
| Curb weight | 1,555kg3,428lb | 1,635kg3,605lb |
| Gross weight | 2,150kg4,740lb | 2,280kg5,027lb |
| Top speed | 234 km/h 145 mph | 228 km/h 142 mph |
| To 99% top speed | 72.4s99% target: 232 km/h / 144 mph Calculated | 65.4s99% target: 226 km/h / 140 mph Calculated |
| 0-100 km/h | 6.5s | 6.3s |
| 0-200 km/h | 26.8s Calculated | 27.0s Calculated |
| 0-60 mph | 6.2s Calculated | 6.0s Calculated |
| Fuel consumption | 6.9L/100 km34.1mpg US40.9mpg UK | 7.7L/100 km30.5mpg US36.7mpg UK |
| Fuel consumption city | 8.5L/100 km27.7mpg US33.2mpg UK | 9.7L/100 km24.2mpg US29.1mpg UK |
| Fuel consumption highway | 6L/100 km39.2mpg US47.1mpg UK | 6.9L/100 km34.1mpg US40.9mpg UK |
| Quarter mile | 14.6s Calculated | 14.4s Calculated |
| Power-to-weight | 149hp/t111kW/t67hp/1000 lb Calculated | 141hp/t105kW/t64hp/1000 lb Calculated |
| Torque-to-weight | 225Nm/t151lb-ft/ton Calculated | 214Nm/t143lb-ft/ton Calculated |
| Estimated range | 739km459mi Calculated | 779km484mi Calculated |
| Displacement | 1,998cc122cu in | 1,984cc121cu in |
| Length | 4,299mm169in | 4,486mm177in |
| Width | 1,822mm72in | 1,839mm72in |
| Height | 1,557mm61in | 1,673mm66in |
| Wheelbase | 2,670mm105in | 2,677mm105in |
| Front track | 1,565mm62in | 1,586mm62in |
| Rear track | 1,567mm62in | 1,576mm62in |
| Ground clearance | - | 200mm8in |
| Trunk volume | 450L | 615L |
| Max trunk volume | 1,390L | 1,655L |
| Doors | 5 | 5 |
| Seats | 5 | 5 |
| Fuel tank | 51L | 60L |
| CO2 emissions | 158g/km | 175g/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 Countryman (F60) JCW 2.0: Power / Torque
- Volkswagen Tiguan II 2.0 TSI: Power / Torque
| Vehicle | Peak power RPM | Peak torque RPM | Max engine speed |
|---|---|---|---|
| MiniCountryman (F60)JCW 2.0 | 5,000-6,000 rpm | 1,450-4,500 rpm | 6,250 rpm |
| VolkswagenTiguan II2.0 TSI | 4,500 rpm | 1,500 rpm | 4,750 rpm |
Acceleration curve
Estimated speed over time for selected vehicles.
| Metric | MiniCountryman (F60)JCW 2.0 | VolkswagenTiguan II2.0 TSI |
|---|---|---|
| Acceleration checkpoints | ||
0-60 mph 0-97 km/h | 6.2 s | 6.0 s |
0-100 km/h 0-62 mph | 6.5 s | 6.3 s |
0-200 km/h 0-124 mph | 26.8 s | 27.0 s |
| Top speed | 234 km/h 145 mph | 228 km/h 142 mph |
| Drag race simulation | ||
60 ft 18 m | 2.4 s | 2.4 s |
330 ft 101 m | 6.4 s | 6.3 s |
1/8 mile 201 m | 9.5 s | 9.4 s |
1000 ft 305 m | 12.3 s | 12.1 s |
1/4 mile 402 m | 14.6 s | 14.4 s |
Trap speed 1/4 mile 402 m | 159 km/h 99 mph | 160 km/h 99 mph |
Power comparison
Bar comparison chart for Power. Higher is better · hp / kW
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| MiniCountryman (F60)JCW 2.0 | 231 hp 172 kW |
| VolkswagenTiguan II2.0 TSI | 230 hp 172 kW |
Mini Countryman (F60) JCW 2.0 has 1 hp more than Volkswagen Tiguan II 2.0 TSI.
The biggest power difference is between Volkswagen Tiguan II 2.0 TSI and Mini Countryman (F60) JCW 2.0: 1 hp (1 kW).
Torque comparison
Bar comparison chart for Torque. Higher is better · Nm / lb-ft
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| MiniCountryman (F60)JCW 2.0 | 350 Nm 258 lb-ft |
| VolkswagenTiguan II2.0 TSI | 350 Nm 258 lb-ft |
Curb weight comparison
Bar comparison chart for Curb weight. Lower is better · kg / lb
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| MiniCountryman (F60)JCW 2.0 | 1,555 kg 3,428 lb |
| VolkswagenTiguan II2.0 TSI | 1,635 kg 3,605 lb |
Top speed without limiter comparison
Bar comparison chart for Top speed without limiter. Higher is better · km/h / mph
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| MiniCountryman (F60)JCW 2.0 | 234 km/h 145 mph |
| VolkswagenTiguan II2.0 TSI | 228 km/h 142 mph |
0-100 km/h comparison
Bar comparison chart for 0-100 km/h. Lower is better · seconds
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| MiniCountryman (F60)JCW 2.0 | 6.5 s |
| VolkswagenTiguan II2.0 TSI | 6.3 s |
Although Mini Countryman (F60) JCW 2.0 has more power, Volkswagen Tiguan II 2.0 TSI is quicker from 0-100 km/h.
The biggest 0-100 km/h difference is between Volkswagen Tiguan II 2.0 TSI and Mini Countryman (F60) JCW 2.0: 0.2 s.
Fuel consumption comparison
Bar comparison chart for Fuel consumption. Lower is better · L/100 km / mpg US / mpg UK
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| MiniCountryman (F60)JCW 2.0 | 6.9 L/100 km 34.1 mpg US 40.9 mpg UK |
| VolkswagenTiguan II2.0 TSI | 7.7 L/100 km 30.5 mpg US 36.7 mpg UK |
The biggest fuel consumption difference is between Mini Countryman (F60) JCW 2.0 and Volkswagen Tiguan II 2.0 TSI: 0.8 L/100 km.
Power-to-weight comparison
Bar comparison chart for Power-to-weight. Higher is better · hp/t / kW/t
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| MiniCountryman (F60)JCW 2.0 | 149 hp/t 111 kW/t 6.7 kg/hp |
| VolkswagenTiguan II2.0 TSI | 141 hp/t 105 kW/t 7.1 kg/hp |
Estimated range comparison
Bar comparison chart for Estimated range. Higher is better · km / mi
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| MiniCountryman (F60)JCW 2.0 | 739 km 459 mi |
| VolkswagenTiguan II2.0 TSI | 779 km 484 mi |
Performance spider chart
Radar chart comparing normalized performance and fuel-consumption scores.
| Vehicle | Power | Acceleration | Top speed |
|---|---|---|---|
| MiniCountryman (F60)JCW 2.0 | 231 hp 172 kW | 6.5 s | 234 km/h 145 mph |
| VolkswagenTiguan II2.0 TSI | 230 hp 172 kW | 6.3 s | 228 km/h 142 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 | ||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MiniCountryman (F60)JCW 2.0 |
|
| ||||||||||||||
| VolkswagenTiguan II2.0 TSI |
|
| ||||||||||||||
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 | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MiniCountryman (F60)JCW 2.0 |
| 6.9 L/100 km 34.1 mpg US 40.9 mpg UK | ||||||
| VolkswagenTiguan II2.0 TSI |
| 7.7 L/100 km 30.5 mpg US 36.7 mpg UK | ||||||
Volkswagen Tiguan II 2.0 TSI 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 |
|---|---|---|
| MiniCountryman (F60)JCW 2.0 | 6.9 L/100 km 34.1 mpg US 40.9 mpg UK | 6.5 s |
| VolkswagenTiguan II2.0 TSI | 7.7 L/100 km 30.5 mpg US 36.7 mpg UK | 6.3 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 |
|---|---|---|
| MiniCountryman (F60)JCW 2.0 | 149 hp/t 111 kW/t 6.7 kg/hp | 6.9 L/100 km 34.1 mpg US 40.9 mpg UK |
| VolkswagenTiguan II2.0 TSI | 141 hp/t 105 kW/t 7.1 kg/hp | 7.7 L/100 km 30.5 mpg US 36.7 mpg UK |
Detailed score breakdown
| Vehicle | MiniCountryman (F60)JCW 2.0 | VolkswagenTiguan II2.0 TSI | ||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power | 231 hp 172 kW | 230 hp 172 kW | ||||||||||||||||
| Torque | 350 Nm 258 lb-ft | 350 Nm 258 lb-ft | ||||||||||||||||
| Acceleration | 6.5 s | 6.3 s | ||||||||||||||||
| Top speed | 234 km/h 145 mph | 228 km/h 142 mph | ||||||||||||||||
| Lightness | 1,555 kg 3,428 lb | 1,635 kg 3,605 lb | ||||||||||||||||
| Fuel consumption | 6.9 L/100 km 34.1 mpg US 40.9 mpg UK | 7.7 L/100 km 30.5 mpg US 36.7 mpg UK | ||||||||||||||||
| Practicality |
|
| ||||||||||||||||
| Range score | 739 km 459 mi | 779 km 484 mi | ||||||||||||||||
| CO2 score | 158 g/km | 175 g/km | ||||||||||||||||
| Trunk score | 450 L 15.9 cu ft | 615 L 21.7 cu ft | ||||||||||||||||
| Power-to-weight score | 149 hp/t 111 kW/t 6.7 kg/hp | 141 hp/t 105 kW/t 7.1 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 Countryman (F60) JCW 2.0 | Volkswagen Tiguan II 2.0 TSI |
|---|---|---|
| Consumption | 6.9 L/100 km34.1 mpg US40.9 mpg UK | 7.7 L/100 km30.5 mpg US36.7 mpg UK |
| Cost / 100 km | 12.08 LC100 km | 13.48 LC100 km |
| Cost / 100 mi | 19.43 LC100 mi | 21.69 LC100 mi |
| Annual fuel used | 1,035 L273 US gal228 UK gal | 1,155 L305 US gal254 UK gal |
| Annual fuel cost | 1,811 LC/year | 2,021 LC/year |
Head-to-head comparisons
Mini Countryman (F60) JCW 2.0
- Has 1 hp more
- Is 80 kg lighter
- Has 6 km/h (4 mph) higher top speed
- Uses 0.8 L/100 km less fuel
- Has 8 hp/t better power-to-weight
- Emits 17 g/km less CO2
Pros
- Highest top speed
- Most powerful
- Highest torque
- Lightest
- Lowest combined fuel consumption
- Best power-to-weight ratio
Cons
- Slowest 0-100 km/h
- Smallest trunk
Volkswagen Tiguan II 2.0 TSI
- Is 0.2 s quicker from 0-100 km/h
- Has 40 km (25 mi) more estimated range
- Has 165 L more trunk volume
Pros
- Quickest 0-100 km/h in this comparison
- Best estimated range
- Largest trunk
Cons
- Lowest power
- Highest combined fuel consumption
- Heaviest
- Lowest top speed
- Highest CO2 emissions
Choose cars to compare
Popular comparisons























