Kia Niro EV vs Lynk & Co 02
Biggest differences: DC charging — Kia Niro EV 80 kW, Lynk & Co 02 150 kW · Charging 10–80% — Kia Niro EV 43 min, Lynk & Co 02 30 min · 0–100 km/h — Kia Niro EV 7.8 s, Lynk & Co 02 5.5 s.
Kia Niro EV
The Kia Niro EV is an electric crossover in the C-segment, offering front-wheel drive and a range of up to 460 km according to the WLTP cycle.
Lynk & Co 02
The Lynk & Co 02 Long Range (Model Year 2025) is a compact SUV with rear-wheel drive and a WLTP range of 445 kilometers.
Profile against the market: Kia Niro EV vs Lynk & Co 02
Kia Niro EV64.8 kWh
Lynk & Co 02Long Range
Kia Niro EV or Lynk & Co 02 — who wins where
Lynk & Co 02 leads 6 to 4
Click a slice to see only those metrics. Each bar shows where the car stands against the whole catalogue.
- WLTP range kmKia Niro EV +15 km
- Battery kWhLynk & Co 02 +1.2 kWh
- Consumption ↓ kWh/100 kmKia Niro EV −0.9 kWh/100 km
- Power PSLynk & Co 02 +68 PS
- 0–100 km/h ↓ sLynk & Co 02 −2.3 s
- Top speed km/hLynk & Co 02 +13 km/h
- DC charging kWLynk & Co 02 +70 kW
- AC charging kWNo difference
- Charging ↓ minLynk & Co 02 −13 min
- Weight ↓ kgKia Niro EV −210 kg
- Boot lKia Niro EV +65 l
Technical data: Kia Niro EV vs Lynk & Co 02
Bold and underline = better value · ↓ = lower is better · — = no data
| Key parameters | Kia Niro EV 64.8 kWh | Lynk & Co 02 Long Range | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Range and energy | |||
| WLTP range | 460 km | 445 km | Kia +15 km |
| Battery | 64.8 kWh | 66 kWh | Lynk & Co +1.2 kWh |
| Consumption ↓ | 16.2 kWh/100 km | 17.1 kWh/100 km | Kia −0.9 kWh/100 km |
| Charging | |||
| DC charging | 80 kW | 150 kW | Lynk & Co +70 kW |
| AC charging | 11 kW | 11 kW | No difference |
| Charging 10–80% ↓ | 43 min | 30 min | Lynk & Co −13 min |
| Range per minute of charging | 7.5 km/min | 10.4 km/min | Lynk & Co +2.9 km/min |
| Voltage | 400 V | 400 V | No difference |
| Performance and drivetrain | |||
| Power | 204 PS | 272 PS | Lynk & Co +68 PS |
| 0–100 km/h ↓ | 7.8 s | 5.5 s | Lynk & Co −2.3 s |
| Top speed | 167 km/h | 180 km/h | Lynk & Co +13 km/h |
| Drivetrain | FWD | RWD | different type |
| Practicality | |||
| Weight ↓ | 1610 kg | 1820 kg | Kia −210 kg |
| Boot | 475 l | 410 l | Kia +65 l |
| V2L (external power) | Yes | Yes | — |
| Length | 4420 mm | 4460 mm | Lynk & Co +40 mm |
| Width | 1825 mm | 1845 mm | Lynk & Co +20 mm |
| Height | 1570 mm | 1573 mm | Lynk & Co +3 mm |
| Wheelbase | 2720 mm | 2755 mm | Lynk & Co +35 mm |
The better value in each row is bold and underlined in the colour of the car. Metrics marked ↓ — lower is better. Dimensions are shown without picking a winner.
Energy cost calculator
Kia Niro EV
Lynk & Co 02
Amounts are in your currency — enter prices in the currency you use.
Video reviews of both models
Kia Niro EV
Lynk & Co 02
Other comparisons in this class: Crossover / SUV, segment C
Frequently asked questions about this comparison
Which has the longer range — Kia Niro EV or Lynk & Co 02?
The Kia Niro EV goes further: 460 km WLTP against the 445 km of the Lynk & Co 02. That is a difference of 15 km.
Why does the Lynk & Co 02 have a bigger battery but a shorter range than the Kia Niro EV?
The Lynk & Co 02 carries 66 kWh and covers 445 km, while the Kia Niro EV with its 64.8 kWh battery does 460 km. Energy use decides it: 17.1 against 16.2 kWh/100 km.
How do the drivetrains of the Kia Niro EV and the Lynk & Co 02 differ?
The Kia Niro EV has FWD and 204 PS. The Lynk & Co 02 has RWD and 272 PS.
Which is more powerful — Kia Niro EV or Lynk & Co 02?
The Lynk & Co 02 is stronger: 272 PS against the 204 PS of the Kia Niro EV. The gap is 68 PS.
Technical data comes from official manufacturer materials and we do our best to verify it, but a manufacturer can change a specification without notice and mistakes do happen. Confirm the figures with a dealer before you buy — we accept no liability for decisions made on the basis of this data. Full disclaimer
Range, consumption and weight are given for the base configuration: manufacturers homologate them as a band of values that depends on wheels and equipment (e.g. 533–592 km), and we take the lightest variant, on the smallest wheels — i.e. the most favourable. The same model on larger wheels will travel a shorter distance.