Compare performance (168 HP vs 313 HP), boot space and price (23,900 £ vs 30,100 £ ) at a glance. Find out which car is the better choice for you – Ford Puma or MINI Countryman?
All details on performance, efficiency, range and trunk space can be found in the technical comparison below – including user reviews for both models.
In the bustling market of compact SUVs, the Ford Puma and MINI Countryman have managed to capture the spotlight with their distinctive styles and cutting-edge technology. Both models cater to the modern driver who demands a blend of practicality and charisma. Let’s dive into how these two vehicles stack up against each other in terms of design, performance, and innovation.
The Ford Puma boasts a sleek and sporty design with a touch of elegance, perfect for the urban landscape. Its compact dimensions, with a length ranging from 4186 to 4226 mm, provide excellent maneuverability, making it an ideal choice for city dwellers. Despite its compact size, the Puma offers a spacious interior with up to 523 liters of trunk space, accommodating the needs of an active lifestyle.
On the other hand, the MINI Countryman presents itself with a robust and adventurous aesthetic, slightly longer at around 4445 mm. The Countryman's interior is designed for comfort and versatility, with a trunk capacity ranging between 450 to 505 liters, depending on the model. Its larger profile suggests an SUV ready for both city streets and country roads.
When it comes to performance, the Ford Puma offers a range of petrol MHEV and electric options. Power output varies from 125 to 168 HP, and the model is known for its impressive fuel efficiency with petrol variants consuming between 5.4 to 6 L/100km. The electric variant of the Puma takes efficiency a step further, offering range figures between 364 to 376 km with a 43 kWh battery.
The MINI Countryman ups the ante with a broader engine selection, including petrol, diesel, and fully electric options. Its power output can soar up to 313 HP for the more athletic models. Fuel consumption for the petrol variants spans from 5.9 to 7.8 L/100km, while its electric version offers a more extended range of up to 462 km, supported by a 64.6 kWh battery.
Both vehicles are equipped with state-of-the-art technology to enhance the driving experience. The Ford Puma integrates advanced safety features and convenience systems, including adaptive cruise control and a comprehensive digital cockpit for a futuristic driving feel.
Meanwhile, the MINI Countryman is no slouch, featuring a range of high-tech innovations such as a dual-clutch automatic transmission system and MINI’s own infotainment system, designed for both entertainment and functionality. The availability of all-wheel-drive in the Countryman also provides additional traction and stability, catering to those who venture off the beaten path.
Choosing between the Ford Puma and the MINI Countryman comes down to preference and lifestyle needs. The Ford Puma appeals to those seeking efficiency and a dynamic driving experience wrapped in a compact design. Meanwhile, the MINI Countryman offers a well-rounded package with more power and versatility for those who need a bit more room and off-road capability.
Both vehicles stand out with their unique attributes, securing their places in the fiercely competitive compact SUV segment. Ultimately, whether it's the stylish practicality of the Puma or the audacious charm of the Countryman, drivers are bound to find a model that resonates with their driving aspirations.
Price and efficiency are often the first things buyers look at. Here it becomes clear which model has the long-term edge – whether at the pump, the plug, or in purchase price.
Ford Puma is markedly cheaper – starting at 23,900 £ , while the MINI Countryman costs 30,100 £ . That’s a price difference of around 6,171 £.
Fuel consumption also shows a difference: the Ford Puma uses 5.4 L/100km and is marginally more efficient than the MINI Countryman with 5.9 L/100km. The difference is about 0.5 L/100km.
In terms of energy consumption, the Ford Puma is slightly more efficient: consuming 13 kWh/100km compared to 14.8 kWh/100km for the MINI Countryman. That’s a difference of about 1.8 kWh/100km.
As for electric range, the MINI Countryman offers moderately more range – reaching up to 497 km, about 80 km more than the Ford Puma.
Under the bonnet, it becomes clear which model is tuned for sportiness and which one takes the lead when you hit the accelerator.
When it comes to engine power, the MINI Countryman offers considerably more power – delivering 313 HP compared to 168 HP. That’s roughly 145 HP more horsepower.
When accelerating from 0 to 100 km/h, the MINI Countryman is noticeably quicker – completing the sprint in 5.6 s, while the Ford Puma takes 7.4 s. That’s about 1.8 s quicker.
There’s also a difference in torque: the MINI Countryman delivers considerably more torque with 494 Nm compared to 290 Nm. That’s about 204 Nm more.
Whether family car or daily driver – which one offers more room, flexibility and comfort?
Both vehicles offer seating for 5 people.
In terms of curb weight, Ford Puma is a bit lighter – 1,316 kg compared to 1,570 kg. The difference is around 254 kg.
When it comes to payload, the MINI Countryman carries very slightly more – 500 kg compared to 469 kg. That’s a difference of about 31 kg.
The MINI Countryman is decisively ahead in the objective data comparison.
This result only shows which model scores more points on paper – not which of the two cars feels right for you.
The Ford Puma blends sporty styling with practical everyday usability, making it a smart choice for drivers who want flair without sacrificing versatility. Its engaging driving character and clever interior packaging give it a more dynamic and useful feel than many rivals.
details
The MINI Countryman turns the cheeky charm of a classic MINI into a proper all-rounder, blending playful styling with surprisingly usable space for everyday life. It still grins at city lights but will happily tackle muddy lanes, perfect for buyers who want character without sacrificing practicality.
details
Costs and Consumption |
|
|---|---|
|
Price
23,900 - 36,300 £
|
Price
30,100 - 39,900 £
|
|
Consumption L/100km
5.4 - 5.9 L/100km
|
Consumption L/100km
5.9 - 6.5 L/100km
|
|
Consumption kWh/100km
13 - 13.7 kWh/100km
|
Consumption kWh/100km
14.8 - 15.9 kWh/100km
|
|
Electric Range
404 - 417 km
|
Electric Range
463 - 497 km
|
|
Battery Capacity
-
|
Battery Capacity
-
|
|
co2
0 - 135 g/km
|
co2
0 - 149 g/km
|
|
Fuel tank capacity
-
|
Fuel tank capacity
-
|
Dimensions and Body |
|
|---|---|
|
Body Type
SUV
|
Body Type
SUV
|
|
Seats
5
|
Seats
5
|
|
Doors
-
|
Doors
-
|
|
Curb weight
1,316 - 1,563 kg
|
Curb weight
1,570 - 2,075 kg
|
|
Trunk capacity
-
|
Trunk capacity
450 - 460 L
|
|
Length
-
|
Length
-
|
|
Width
1,805 mm
|
Width
1,843 mm
|
|
Height
-
|
Height
-
|
|
Max trunk capacity
-
|
Max trunk capacity
-
|
|
Payload
367 - 469 kg
|
Payload
475 - 500 kg
|
Engine and Performance |
|
|---|---|
|
Engine Type
Petrol MHEV, Electric
|
Engine Type
Petrol MHEV, Electric
|
|
Transmission
Manuel, Automatic
|
Transmission
Automatic
|
|
Transmission Detail
Manual Gearbox, Dual-Clutch Automatic, Reduction Gearbox
|
Transmission Detail
Dual-Clutch Automatic, Reduction Gearbox
|
|
Drive Type
Front-Wheel Drive
|
Drive Type
Front-Wheel Drive, All-Wheel Drive
|
|
Power HP
125 - 168 HP
|
Power HP
122 - 313 HP
|
|
Acceleration 0-100km/h
7.4 - 9.8 s
|
Acceleration 0-100km/h
5.6 - 10.5 s
|
|
Max Speed
-
|
Max Speed
-
|
|
Torque
170 - 290 Nm
|
Torque
230 - 494 Nm
|
|
Number of Cylinders
3
|
Number of Cylinders
3
|
|
Power kW
92 - 124 kW
|
Power kW
90 - 230 kW
|
|
Engine capacity
999 cm3
|
Engine capacity
1,499 cm3
|
General |
|
|---|---|
|
Model Year
2,025 - 2,026
|
Model Year
2026
|
|
CO2 Efficiency Class
D, A
|
CO2 Efficiency Class
D, A, E
|
|
Brand
Ford
|
Brand
MINI
|
Deutschland
France
Nederland
Great Britain
Sverige
Danmark
Suomi
Italia
Polska
Česko
España