I'm curious about the effect that lowering a MINI has on the transfer of power to the wheels. The reason I bring this up is twofold. 1. A couple of years ago when the Mustang SVT debuted with an independant suspension, the Mustang guys discovered that the IRS consumed a lot of power being transmitted to the wheels (I think it was about 20 or 30 wheel horse power compared to the same car with a live (straight) axle). I understand that this was due to the deflection angles that the half shafts were transmitting the power through. 2. I haven't owned a car in more than a decade that wasn't lowered, and I don't intend to break that streak with my (yet to arive in America) MINI. However, I don't want to reduce the power that is getting to the pavement due to power being wasted through the deflection angles of the half shafts.

Has anyone put their MINI on a chassis dyno before and after lowering? I would like to know actual dyno numbers and not "theoretical, if the intercooler was left in the freezer overnight, the accessory belts and exhaust taken off, and the numbers multiplied by 1.18" I find the current (MINI) trend of "estimating" flywheel horsepower to be reminiscent of the muscle cars when everyone was running "400 horsepower" cars.

Does anyone know what the power losses are on CV joints at specific deflection angles?

Thanks,
DesignIt

 

I'll take a shot at your last question and say that I'm certain that it is Japanese. I recall that Maru was a safe haven, like a house, or harbor for a boat... And from my travels in Japan, I recall some shrines honoring Jingu, mostly in northern Japan... Probably some samuari guy, but I don't know...

Now, about those deflection angles...

 

DesignIt,

Good question- you might call Randy Webb at Webbmotorsports or Eric Savage at Helix13 to ask these questions.

My own opinion is that with the modest lowering of a MINI to say 1" front and rear that we often do by just changing springs, we do not change the geometry of the MINI to a degree that would affect detectable power loss as you have mentioned.
Perhaps with a greater degree of lowering it could be the case. This assumes that correct offset and tiresize is maintained and that alignment is within factory specs.

For the maru answer see
http://www.docoja.com/discus/messages/8/234.html

_________________
ALOHA

 

I hope lowering doesnt reduce power...I'm lowering my mini soon!

 

CV, stands for Constant Velocity, implies the same [minimal] frictional losses within its' functional range of angles. This is a fundamentally different design than the rather lossy universal joints the IRS Mustang Cobra uses. I would venture to say that there is zero change in WHP with any currently available aftermarket springs versus stock.

 

So... can I gain 20hp with a lift kit?

 

I could see the IRS in the Mustang absorbing more power than the solid axle, after all, the presence of flex joints, regardless of angle, will rob some power. I haven't seen any calculations for the power loss at specific angles, but I'd suspect that a straight CV joint compared to a solid axle would show some measurable loss.

 

I can't get into the details like you want about the power loss. I feel, however, that whatever it is, you're more than compensated for it by the increased handling ability of the car with the new springs.

 

Thanks for all the feedback. I didn't consider the U joint vs. CV issue, but a U joint would eat a lot of power. Actually, I didn't know that the Mustang had U joints instead of CVs, but now that I think about it, that makes sense. I like Moorlockx attitude about the increased handling. Worth the trade-off I think.

DesignIt