Drivetrain (Cooper S) MINI Cooper S (R53) intakes, exhausts, pulleys, headers, throttle bodies, and any other modifications to the Cooper S drivetrain.
Sponsored by:
Sponsored by:

R53 Power - Turbo vs Sprintex

  #1  
Old 09-27-2015, 11:22 PM
NYMADMINI
NYMADMINI is offline
2nd Gear
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Long Island, NY
Posts: 56
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
R53 Power - Turbo vs Sprintex

Hello all! I'm looking for input from people who have upgraded their R53's with either a sprintex supercharger upgrade (along with all the usual bolt ons) vs. a turbo conversion and does anyone make a turbo conversion kit for the R53 or are they all custom done? I'd rather stick with supercharging but I've heard some reliability issues with the sprintex units. I've owned lots of turbo cars but I love the way the supercharger winds up in the R53. Also, do both of these setups require fully built motors with forged internals and a new head (like RMW's "Jesus" head" or the JCW head) and if the motors are built is it possible to increase the bore from 1.6L to a 2.0L? I know many people increase to a 1.8. Thanks for all your answers. So you know I have an 06 R53 Checkmate with just about every bolt-on you can find outside of a methanol kit. Car makes around 210hp at the wheels on Heilx's dyno after Jan tuned it post adding 450cc injectors.
 
  #2  
Old 09-28-2015, 05:48 AM
Saltysalt
Saltysalt is offline
6th Gear
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Dover, NH
Posts: 2,234
Received 5 Likes on 5 Posts
the m45 blower (stock) can be had to about 250 whp. this is with a built head and cam. going to a 1.8 stroker can be brought up a bit more, I haven't heard of boring the block, im sure it could be done.


the sprintex ideally pushes more air but has issues with IAT and an oil seal ring, not sure if these issues have been dealt with. but ultimately, a turbo will always make more power than a supercharger. unfortunately a turbo, there is no real kit, there used to be some, but now they are custom made. the cost of the conversion is much higher, since youll need a standalone ecu, custom manifold, waterpump, piping.....
 
  #3  
Old 09-28-2015, 08:53 AM
NYMADMINI
NYMADMINI is offline
2nd Gear
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Long Island, NY
Posts: 56
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Saltysalt View Post
the m45 blower (stock) can be had to about 250 whp. this is with a built head and cam. going to a 1.8 stroker can be brought up a bit more, I haven't heard of boring the block, im sure it could be done. the sprintex ideally pushes more air but has issues with IAT and an oil seal ring, not sure if these issues have been dealt with. but ultimately, a turbo will always make more power than a supercharger. unfortunately a turbo, there is no real kit, there used to be some, but now they are custom made. the cost of the conversion is much higher, since youll need a standalone ecu, custom manifold, waterpump, piping.....
Thanks for the info! I was hoping you didn't have to go stand alone like Motec or DTM - too much $ to spend on my '06 MCS. 250whp is good, but it's "only" 40whp more than where I am now?!? I'm also at 168 ft/lbs to the wheels. With a head and cam what should the torque numbers be at? Lastly, with a head and a cam can you achieve that with a JCW head and a Schrick cam or do you need an RMW or other cam? Also, were you referring to RMW's "Jesus" head vs a JCW (or other if you know)? From what I know of parts and labor (and I have stock headers now going to a milltek cat back and would definitely add headers and a high flow at (most likely from Milltek) this sounds like a $5k-$7k job with parts and labor! And I'll need bigger injectors (mine are only 450cc RMW injectors) and undoubtedly a larger intercooler and a retune! Now it's sounding like $6-$8k more to spend for 40whp?!? Jesus, if I did that in an VW GTI I could have a nearly 400whp kit.
 
  #4  
Old 09-28-2015, 10:01 AM
Saltysalt
Saltysalt is offline
6th Gear
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Dover, NH
Posts: 2,234
Received 5 Likes on 5 Posts
Originally Posted by NYMADMINI View Post
Thanks for the info! I was hoping you didn't have to go stand alone like Motec or DTM - too much $ to spend on my '06 MCS. 250whp is good, but it's "only" 40whp more than where I am now?!? I'm also at 168 ft/lbs to the wheels. With a head and cam what should the torque numbers be at? Lastly, with a head and a cam can you achieve that with a JCW head and a Schrick cam or do you need an RMW or other cam? Also, were you referring to RMW's "Jesus" head vs a JCW (or other if you know)? From what I know of parts and labor (and I have stock headers now going to a milltek cat back and would definitely add headers and a high flow at (most likely from Milltek) this sounds like a $5k-$7k job with parts and labor! And I'll need bigger injectors (mine are only 450cc RMW injectors) and undoubtedly a larger intercooler and a retune! Now it's sounding like $6-$8k more to spend for 40whp?!? Jesus, if I did that in an VW GTI I could have a nearly 400whp kit.

a head and cam I believe will bring you to around 200 twq and 250 whp with a proper tune. and by head, I mean a BVH which the JCW is not, its only very mildy ported on the exhaust.


if you do end up with a BVH and Cam, youll definently need a tune and injectors. you also don't need a larger intercooler, the stock one is fine, if you really need to lower the IAT, get meth injection at this point. and could even potentially tune for that, and run the equivalent of 100 octance everywhere.


after the pulley, getting HP per $ goes way up. gotta pay to play. and from what I understand the stock motor can handle roughly 330 hp crank. the weak point from what I understand are the rods then the pistons.


starting with a turbo car such as a GTI its easier to get more power. superchargers are much harder to get easy power out of since its a fixed displacement.


another option is to check out RMW, ive been following his rotrex build, granted this guy is going nuts to buts on this full caged mini, but that rotrex unit in a street car should pump out some serious work such as 300hp. the m45 is just too small of a unit to push those kind of numbers.


ive only heard when people go turbo they use standalone ECU, but im sure with the right turbo selection, one that can spool at 2000-2500 rpm, the stock ecu may not mind it. but most people get one to spool around 3500-4000 for larger power numbers. granted that smaller turbo wont make as much power, but may still be able to reach 270-300 whp at like 20-22 psi.


stock motor should be able to handle that decently.


keep in mind, most of this is speculation, my plan is to go turbo at some point when my PTO gears give up, which im sure will be a few years down the road, but theres a guy in Peuto Rico that has a turbo r53, just saw a video posted of his car on LXM and it seems very nice.
 
  #5  
Old 09-29-2015, 03:19 AM
eMINI of the State
eMINI of the State is offline
3rd Gear
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 215
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by NYMADMINI View Post
Hello all! I'm looking for input from people who have upgraded their R53's with either a sprintex supercharger upgrade (along with all the usual bolt ons) vs. a turbo conversion and does anyone make a turbo conversion kit for the R53 or are they all custom done? I'd rather stick with supercharging but I've heard some reliability issues with the sprintex units. I've owned lots of turbo cars but I love the way the supercharger winds up in the R53. Also, do both of these setups require fully built motors with forged internals and a new head (like RMW's "Jesus" head" or the JCW head) and if the motors are built is it possible to increase the bore from 1.6L to a 2.0L? I know many people increase to a 1.8. Thanks for all your answers. So you know I have an 06 R53 Checkmate with just about every bolt-on you can find outside of a methanol kit. Car makes around 210hp at the wheels on Heilx's dyno after Jan tuned it post adding 450cc injectors.
Our cylinders should never be bored past .5mm. The gained displacement is negligible, and the strength of the block is degraded. Trying to make more power by weakening your block is nonsensical, that's why Sneed stays stock bore, he played with stroking and boring and found the engine was crippled to handle high power. He focused on making the stock bore block precise and bulletproof, then you can run all the power you want. Some of the fastest minis I've seen run stock bore, and small ports and some even stock heads, the pount of the quad valve chamber was to maximize velocity,
 
  #6  
Old 09-29-2015, 03:50 AM
eMINI of the State
eMINI of the State is offline
3rd Gear
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 215
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by NYMADMINI View Post
Hello all! I'm looking for input from people who have upgraded their R53's with either a sprintex supercharger upgrade (along with all the usual bolt ons) vs. a turbo conversion and does anyone make a turbo conversion kit for the R53 or are they all custom done? I'd rather stick with supercharging but I've heard some reliability issues with the sprintex units. I've owned lots of turbo cars but I love the way the supercharger winds up in the R53. Also, do both of these setups require fully built motors with forged internals and a new head (like RMW's "Jesus" head" or the JCW head) and if the motors are built is it possible to increase the bore from 1.6L to a 2.0L? I know many people increase to a 1.8. Thanks for all your answers. So you know I have an 06 R53 Checkmate with just about every bolt-on you can find outside of a methanol kit. Car makes around 210hp at the wheels on Heilx's dyno after Jan tuned it post adding 450cc injectors.
Sure high cfm will create high hp numbers but the rpm it peaks is raised, higher power won't make you faster if the guy with slightly less hits his 3k before you. Manufacturer team tuners couldn't even tell you peak power, it's irrelevant. They identify the low and high point the driver shifts in and focuses on setting the delta in that range, quickest transient response makes speed, meaning every shift lands in the powerband allowing the car to move through gears as fast as possible. If velocity is completely sacrificed for max CFM the time to reach shifts is greatly increased, and the lower power higher torque guy has left you behind. However, if you're a skilled racer who can drive wide open you can utilize the big valves, but most of us aren't, and spend most our driving around town, my race bikes are like that, run fast on a track but buck and struggle when they can't be run wide open. Just follow racing, the highest power car doesn't always when, it's the cars that put the power where it's needed. HP is a number used to sell parts. Truly fast cars list their 0-60, not their HP. Tractor trailers are slow as **** they have a lot of power. Torque and weight is what determines the time it takes to reach peak power. Also i reporting can lead to a lot of turbulence when the radius is opened, a threat should really be around 85%, hell slit of the s2000 heads are being welded to d crease intake port, large ports slow air down. Another thing to consider is your induction, a turbo and rotrex internally compress so boost is not as affected by a large intake, put the eaton is a blower, that only pushes air, the boost is created by the air stacking against the valve, to litre of a graduated seat and valve will affect boost and cause bow through on crossover, also a huge cave prevents proper deshroudingvrestricting the short turn air flow, a slightly larger intake valve set on a radiused 4 angle seat witha 30* angle let long angle will restrict air flow until max lift alllowing not only the retention of velocity, but the wider angle will allow near the same CFM as the big valve, especially since the rear chamber is open to short side air flow. If you auto rose all day with the pedal planted then a big valve won't impede you, but most of us drive our cars daily, and I don't care what some peoe may say, the laws of fluid dynamics show that a wider space will slow air and cost low end power, that's not an opinion that's documented science, that's why hydraulic systems utilize decreasing diameter lines, to increase pressure and power:
 
  #7  
Old 09-30-2015, 04:51 PM
PrplPplEtr's Avatar
PrplPplEtr
PrplPplEtr is offline
5th Gear
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Indy
Posts: 646
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
1.8L and 2.0L strokers are not crippled in any fashion. No idea why he would have said that, but there are a lot of them running around begging to differ.
 
  #8  
Old 10-01-2015, 08:38 AM
soccerbummer1104's Avatar
soccerbummer1104
soccerbummer1104 is offline
5th Gear
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Inman, SC
Posts: 1,098
Received 5 Likes on 2 Posts
general rule of thumb : for 200-250 hp you are better off just sticking to the stock blower and doing head, pistons, cam, pulley, etc etc.

For 250-300, its about the same price to stick with a turbo or to do a turbo conversion.

If you want above 300 you very quickly get into a game of the turbo being more cost effective, but the SC will still have better throttle response.

Almost anything north of 260-275 you will benefit from having a stanalone (just for general reliability and driveability. The 2nd gen ViPEC ECU's (i series) are even OBD-II compatible and are possible to make emissions compliant if your state does testing.

(as apposed to some idiots that drop WAYY to much time and money into twincharge setups like myself, but I enjoy the challenge and it keeps me busy in the colder months when I cannot / will not go hiking or wakeboarding as often )
 
  #9  
Old 10-03-2015, 06:09 PM
KinetechMW
KinetechMW is offline
1st Gear
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Union County, North Carolina
Posts: 45
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Our stage 1 turbo kit just made 267hp on a dyno, on a bone stock r53. The car drives like it meant to have a turbo from factory. We are getting the stage 2 turbo kit tuned right now.
 
  #10  
Old 10-05-2015, 10:21 AM
Saltysalt
Saltysalt is offline
6th Gear
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Dover, NH
Posts: 2,234
Received 5 Likes on 5 Posts
Originally Posted by KinetechMW View Post
Our stage 1 turbo kit just made 267hp on a dyno, on a bone stock r53. The car drives like it meant to have a turbo from factory. We are getting the stage 2 turbo kit tuned right now.
well this is interesting I am curious what this stage 1 kit, and stage 2 kits are
 
  #11  
Old 10-06-2015, 12:16 PM
soccerbummer1104's Avatar
soccerbummer1104
soccerbummer1104 is offline
5th Gear
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Inman, SC
Posts: 1,098
Received 5 Likes on 2 Posts
at 267whp on a turbo that is about what you could achieve with a simple JCW fuel injector upgrade, log manifold, nice littlw BW turbo (38-45mm turbo), throw on the base cooper water pump and alternator, make an adapter or weld on an adapter to the intake manifold for the cooper (or use the cooper intake manifold) and use a top-mount intercooler ala M7 style and you would be in good business for that power level Stock bottom end would be just fine, only thing that may be good to change in the valvetrain would be exhaust valves (different material for the heat) and the cam
 
  #12  
Old 10-06-2015, 12:57 PM
Saltysalt
Saltysalt is offline
6th Gear
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Dover, NH
Posts: 2,234
Received 5 Likes on 5 Posts
Originally Posted by soccerbummer1104 View Post
at 267whp on a turbo that is about what you could achieve with a simple JCW fuel injector upgrade, log manifold, nice littlw BW turbo (38-45mm turbo), throw on the base cooper water pump and alternator, make an adapter or weld on an adapter to the intake manifold for the cooper (or use the cooper intake manifold) and use a top-mount intercooler ala M7 style and you would be in good business for that power level Stock bottom end would be just fine, only thing that may be good to change in the valvetrain would be exhaust valves (different material for the heat) and the cam

I believe this is the same guy on facebook that posted as well, apparently "all stock engine" as posted minus injectors which were medium, so 380cc? and another person did nearly the same, but achieved 315 hp with factory parts and ECU.


with all that work, wouldn't you atleaste do a front mount intercooler? since the horns would be removed anyways. this is all making me want a turbo real bad
 
  #13  
Old 10-06-2015, 07:31 PM
soccerbummer1104's Avatar
soccerbummer1104
soccerbummer1104 is offline
5th Gear
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Inman, SC
Posts: 1,098
Received 5 Likes on 2 Posts
you could, but it is more complicated than it would seem at first glance.

If you don't mind ditching your AC you can fit a front mount on the car, or you can shorten and thicken your radiator slightly and use a dual pass, custom fans etc and put the turbo intercooler on top. (bottom grill feeds radiator, top grill feeds intercooler)

more than one way to skin a cat though...
 
  #14  
Old 12-14-2016, 02:33 PM
Mini Mania's Avatar
Mini Mania
Mini Mania is online now
Vendor
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Nevada City, Calif
Posts: 3,272
Received 10 Likes on 10 Posts
Turbo Upgrade

The latest application guide for turbo replacement or upgrade is now available:

http://new.minimania.com/Mini_Cooper...lication_Guide

Drive Hard. Drive Safe. Keep Grinning.
 
__________________
Industry Leader in MINI Cooper and Classic Mini Parts and Accessories
Open M-F 6am-5pm PT | 800-946-2642 | MiniMania.com


Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Teh
Drivetrain (Cooper S)
16
09-19-2015 11:49 PM
WestfaliaR
MINI Parts for Sale
1
08-19-2015 08:01 AM
Super Coop
Navigation & Audio
0
08-17-2015 05:09 PM
Mini Mania
Vendor Announcements
0
08-11-2015 09:01 AM
Ambient Thermal Management
Drivetrain (Cooper S)
0
08-07-2015 12:27 PM


Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Quick Reply: R53 Power - Turbo vs Sprintex


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

© 2019 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands

We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.