R56 S JCW Dyno results

[msh441]

OK, to preface, there are not mine... I cut and pasted them from somewhere else, so I can't comment on any of the other dyno intracacies that may have been involved. That said, I think they are pretty representative of what we've been expecting to see out of the Stage 1 JCW and consistant with what many of us have described with regards to the ECU effect of the power curve itself. So 189.9 bhp at the wheels, 204.1 bhp at the crank and 206.6 lb/ft of torque at 4566 rpm . That's such a nice smooooootttthhhhh power curve, too ! You will definately get more power from some of the aftermarket verndors for the same price (Alta's showing 250+ with various combinations of their accessories!!!)... but I haven't seen anyone showing that smooth of a delivery just yet. They all still have that dreadded dip around 3000 rpm. It's the best part about the JCW kit IMO. It just makes the car that much more drivable. I figure once I get brave I'll tap into a little more power using Alta's boost tubes, turbo inlet and intercooler. That should be good for another 25-30bhp. I think I'd be more than happy sitting in the 210-215 at the wheels and 215 lb/ft of torque give-or-take . One can dream !

[japper]

Originally Posted by msh441

OK, to preface, there are not mine... I cut and pasted them from somewhere else, so I can't comment on any of the other dyno intracacies that may have been involved.

That said, I think they are pretty representative of what we've been expecting to see out of the Stage 1 JCW and consistant with what many of us have described with regards to the ECU effect of the power curve itself.



So 189.9 bhp at the wheels, 204.1 bhp at the crank and 206.6 lb/ft of torque at 4566 rpm .



That's such a nice smooooootttthhhhh power curve, too ! You will definately get more power from some of the aftermarket verndors for the same price (Alta's showing 250+ with various combinations of their accessories!!!)... but I haven't seen anyone showing that smooth of a delivery just yet. They all still have that dreadded dip around 3000 rpm. It's the best part about the JCW kit IMO. It just makes the car that much more drivable.


I figure once I get brave I'll tap into a little more power using Alta's boost tubes, turbo inlet and intercooler. That should be good for another 25-30bhp. I think I'd be more than happy sitting in the 210-215 at the wheels and 215 lb/ft of torque give-or-take .

One can dream !

Yeah i posted this one from a member who had her car RR here in Scotland. I agree with the very smooth power / torque curves. However i think the top line power maybe higher as the drivetrain losses shown above are only around 8%, surely these should be nearer 13% and if so the crank HP must be above 204hp.

Next step for mine is the ALTA turbo inlet and if i like that, then the boost tubes and the GTT stealth cat. That should put it at around 250hp for another £750 and still look pretty stock.

[Bhatch]

nice curves.

I thought the JCW kit had a higher rev limit, but you graphs stop at 6500?

[japper]

Originally Posted by Bhatch

nice curves.

I thought the JCW kit had a higher rev limit, but you graphs stop at 6500?

I don't think the rev limit is any higher, but peak power is now at 6k revs rather than 5.5k revs.

IIRC rev limit is around 6.8k for both.

[clubspec330i]

That pretty smooth delivery of power. Dyno is one thing, daily usage and drivability is another. I wonder how it drives against Alta and other aftermarket tunners out there.

All and all, pretty decent power from 1.6 litre engine.

[Chris56S]

Can anyone point to a reliable set of 0-60 results with the JCW Stage 1? I've only seen one set of results and they were not impressive (leading me to believe that possibly with another driver it could have been much better).

[Edited to disclose that I'm giving serious consideration to investing in the JCW kit. ]

[davisflyer]

Smoothness has always been the draw of the JCW (along with warranty considerations). Before I purchased my 06 Factory JCW, I drove a couple of modded Mini's, w/15% & 17% reduced pulleys and Alta air intakes. What I found was that as much fun as the modded cars were, I really liked the buttery smooth delivery of the JCW. I a can only imagine it's the same difference with the new car as well!








function __RP_Callback_Helper(str, strCallbackEvent, splitSize, func){var event = null;if (strCallbackEvent){event = document.createEvent('Events');event.initEvent(str CallbackEvent, true, true);}if (str && str.length > 0){var splitList = str.split('|');var strCompare = str;if (splitList.length == splitSize)strCompare = splitList[splitSize-1];var pluginList = document.plugins;for (var count = 0; count < pluginList.length; count++){var sSrc = '';if (pluginList[count] && pluginList[count].src)sSrc = pluginList[count].src;if (strCompare.length >= sSrc.length){if (strCompare.indexOf(sSrc) != -1){func(str, count, pluginList, splitList);break;}}}}if (strCallbackEvent)document.body.dispatchEvent(even t);}function __RP_Coord_Callback(str){var func = function(str, index, pluginList, splitList){pluginList[index].__RP_Coord_Callback = str;pluginList[index].__RP_Coord_Callback_Left = splitList[0];pluginList[index].__RP_Coord_Callback_Top = splitList[1];pluginList[index].__RP_Coord_Callback_Right = splitList[2];pluginList[index].__RP_Coord_Callback_Bottom = splitList[3];};__RP_Callback_Helper(str, 'rp-js-coord-callback', 5, func);}function __RP_Url_Callback(str){var func = function(str, index, pluginList, splitList){pluginList[index].__RP_Url_Callback = str;pluginList[index].__RP_Url_Callback_Vid = splitList[0];pluginList[index].__RP_Url_Callback_Parent = splitList[1];};__RP_Callback_Helper(str, 'rp-js-url-callback', 3, func);}function __RP_TotalBytes_Callback(str){var func = function(str, index, pluginList, splitList){pluginList[index].__RP_TotalBytes_Callback = str;pluginList[index].__RP_TotalBytes_Callback_Bytes = splitList[0];};__RP_Callback_Helper(str, null, 2, func);}function __RP_Connection_Callback(str){var func = function(str, index, pluginList, splitList){pluginList[index].__RP_Connection_Callback = str;pluginList[index].__RP_Connection_Callback_Url = splitList[0];};__RP_Callback_Helper(str, null, 2, func);}

[r56mini]

If the faint blue lines represent the baseline, then it is smoother than the upper red line. What is that blue line?

[scott48]

I'm sure there's no dip cause of the ecu tune, so once we get the Alta one....look out!!

[gasss]

Really interesting, the first dyno graphs jcw that i have saw, in Europe or USA, thx.

In Spain, most of stock units dyno results, always talking about power engine, are about 200-210cv (hp), with around 300nm, i dont know why this different powers between usa and europe versions, even taking bmw power announced (172-175).

This is my dyno graph, all engine stock, in next weeks we´ll have dyno results about european MCS R56 with jcw, i´ll post then.



regards from Madrid

[japper]

Originally Posted by gasss

Really interesting, the first dyno graphs jcw that i have saw, in Europe or USA, thx.

In europe, most of stock units dyno results, always talking about power engine, are about 200-210cv (hp), with around 300nm, i dont know why this different powers between usa and europe versions, even taking bmw power announced (172-175).

This is my dyno graph, all engine stock, in next weeks we´ll have dyno results about european MCS R56 with jcw, i´ll post then.



regards from Madrid

The dyno graphs posted in first post are of a european spec JCW.

This graph above looks like a JCW graph, as it's making peak power at 6k revs rather than 5.5k revs as a stock R56 MCS does / should.

[gasss]

Originally Posted by japper

The dyno graphs posted in first post are of a european spec JCW.

This graph above looks like a JCW graph, as it's making peak power at 6k revs rather than 5.5k revs as a stock R56 MCS does / should.

Upps, sorry, i thought it was an usa spec jcw MCS R56.

The graph i post upper, is about a R56 MCS fully engine stock and only 4500km on OBD at "dyno-day", sure, is my car , most of european graph Stock MCS R56 i´ve saw, make peak power about 5900-6100rpm, like mine, not 5500rpm.

In a few weeks a couple of friends will have the jcw engine kit on in their cars, then i´ll post the dyno graph to compare results.

regards from Madrid

[MotorMouth]

I've seen a dyno of a US spec JCW r56 and it DID have a dip around 3k.

Perhaps they have a slightly different tune in Europe?

[Ryephile]

Of note: non-U.S. spec R56 MCS's do not use MAF, which means their ECU setup is different, thus torque curves may vary from the U.S. spec cars.

[msh441]

Originally Posted by MotorMouth

I've seen a dyno of a US spec JCW r56 and it DID have a dip around 3k.

Perhaps they have a slightly different tune in Europe?

Where?

Link, please.

[MotorMouth]

Originally Posted by msh441

Where?

Link, please.

no link. I'll have to scan it

friend of mine had his dynoed at a local shop. I have a copy of the printout at work but the scanner there sucks. I'll probably have to bring it home to get a good scan. He had two runs on it - it was obvious one run had the overboost kick in and one did not.

[sutter2k]

In an all out race, where people are in the upper rpms, this doesn't really appear to be noticeably faster. Around town driving in may to be snappier, but we need some more mods that increase peak HP in the upper area of the curve

[MotorMouth]

Originally Posted by sutter2k

In an all out race, where people are in the upper rpms, this doesn't really appear to be noticeably faster. Around town driving in may to be snappier, but we need some more mods that increase peak HP in the upper area of the curve

first welcome to the board.
second - it helps across the board but more so at top end so I don't get your statement.
Have you been lurking on the boards awhile studying or have you jumped in fresh?

[MotorMouth]

Here is the dyno plot I was talking about that shows the dip in the US version of the JCW. The guy didn't have his MINI broken in yet so told the guy to let off at 5k rpm so it may not show peak hp, but you can see the dip. There are two runs on this graph. Figures are at the wheels.
As I mentioned earlier my scanner at work sucks.

[gasss]

Originally Posted by MotorMouth

Here is the dyno plot I was talking about that shows the dip in the US version of the JCW. The guy didn't have his MINI broken in yet so told the guy to let off at 5k rpm so it may not show peak hp, but you can see the dip. There are two runs on this graph. Figures are at the wheels.
As I mentioned earlier my scanner at work sucks.

is it an usa spec jcw R56? , sorry, but surely is one of the worst dyno graph that i´ve ever saw talking about MCS R56, max power at 5100rpm? torque up and down? , i suppose that this engine has serious problems.

thx for show us the graph motormouth

regards from Madrid

[MotorMouth]

Originally Posted by gasss

is it an usa spec jcw R56? , sorry, but surely is one of the worst dyno graph that i´ve ever saw talking about MCS R56, max power at 5100rpm? torque up and down? , i suppose that this engine has serious problems.

thx for show us the graph motormouth

regards from Madrid

Originally Posted by MotorMouth

Here is the dyno plot I was talking about that shows the dip in the US version of the JCW. The guy didn't have his MINI broken in yet so told the guy to let off at 5k rpm so it may not show peak hp, but you can see the dip. . Figures are at the wheels.
As I mentioned earlier my scanner at work sucks.

read the paragraph before the graph. =)

It's actually not bad with 196 torque at the wheels. The torque up and down is pretty normal in most plots I've seen.

[msh441]

Originally Posted by MotorMouth

Here is the dyno plot I was talking about that shows the dip in the US version of the JCW. The guy didn't have his MINI broken in yet so told the guy to let off at 5k rpm so it may not show peak hp, but you can see the dip.

Thanks MM. Still not that far off from the Euro-spec chart if you look close. Some variations, but still smoothed out the 3000 RPM trench somewhat. More of a leveling of hp & a dip in torque vs. the chasm which was there as stock. Fairly consistant with what I'm feeling at 10K miles. I think it might be exaggerated a bit on that chart, though... as the overboost kicking in early on (on one run, at least), as the operator is looking to chop the throddle at 5K.

[gasss]

Originally Posted by MotorMouth

read the paragraph before the graph. =)

It's actually not bad with 196 torque at the wheels. The torque up and down is pretty normal in most plots I've seen.

ok, i saw the graph but i didnt read the post completly, sorry, so, i think would be very interesting to know the complete curve rpm results, a graph showing results until the redline, or at least 6200rpm.

regards from Madrid

[sutter2k]

Originally Posted by MotorMouth

first welcome to the board.
second - it helps across the board but more so at top end so I don't get your statement.
Have you been lurking on the boards awhile studying or have you jumped in fresh?

Thanks,
I've been lurking.
Currently have an 05 legacy gt with ~373whp/390wtq. I am happy with it, but may be interested in a mini, 08 sti, evo x in 9 months or so.

back to topic....

In a highway race, the mid range isn't going to do anything for you after the initial jump. Hopefully other mods open up the top end.
Perhaps the turbo is just out of breath and the point so there is not much to be gained after 4700 rpms. Either way, since there is no increase after 4600rpm 1/4 mile Mph has hardly be affected. Other than "feel" is the car isn't any faster.

[Bhatch]

Originally Posted by sutter2k

Other than "feel" is the car isn't any faster.

Yeah, i am really waiting for 7k redline and 200whp at it. That would be really nice.