there aren't too many 1.6 engines out there that you can take, add a turbo and change only the pistons to make 500 WHP with with out breaking something...so I don;t think it's so lame...but that's me....

 

wow, cant argue against that.. to get 500hp in a 2005 M3 costs a hell alot more than what it cost in a mini..

 

It's not hp that's impressive about the new engine. It's torque. Apparently something like 80+% will be available from as low as 1400RPMs. That's unheard of with a 1.6L. Heck most 1.6L engines (including the current S engine in stock form) want to stall with any kind of power input at 1.4k RPMs.

 

Now that's funny. He's talking about "safer" as in MINI won't take sales away from a potentially less powered entry 3 series - NOT that the 3 series is safer than a MINI! That's pretty funny! You cracked me up!

 

This is not a new thought but....most Mini buyers don't mod their cars and think the curent engine is pretty nice....... IMO I don't see the Mini buyer and the 3 series buyer as the same...... I think a lot of Mini people buy the car for image reasons.......while the 3 series buyers also buy for image the image is very different....... Randy Webb commented to me that he has concerns about the new engine from what he is learing about the Elise engine which in his words is similar....... I rode in a mostly stock 05 car the other day and was pretty impressed....... Maybe this car we know and love will be the 69' Camaro of the future....... who knows?

 

Yeah, he already caught me on that. Oops, the pitfalls of speed-reading - especially after bedtime.

...Glad I could be of some comic relief for you!

 

Maybe I'm off based here, but I think when people think of the MINI, it is the performance in the agility arena (ie, cornering, nimble feel) that is important. Sure a lot of us would like a more powerful engine, but I feel the current Tritec does its job admirably.

 

My position is that I do not care if the motor has dual this, titanium that, as long as it performs to my expectations, is reliable, and gets decent gas mileage.

I know some motors have variable timing and other features that MINI is missing, but this does not bother me.

I have worked in R&D for about 30 years now, and our most sucessful products have been the one that meets customer's performance expectations. The most simple way you can do that the, better off you are.

I like the MINI, and other cars. I choose to drive the MINI because it has the right mix of gas mileage/fun to drive/affordability that suits me.

 

SO....And yet everybody still rips them apart and rebuilds them. As several people pointed out the bottom end is indestructible...No matter how it comes from the factory all you tuners will replace every moving part in a quest for more HP

I believe strongly that the S badge should be removed. It is very clear that this was for the supercharger, not "sport" They dont make your car an S when you get the "sport" pkg...If you want a turbo put the T badge on

 

Not for nothin', but VTEC is not the be-all end-all. Torque numbers are always far lower (S2000: 240-hp, 160-lb/ft, Civic: 200hp, 139-lb/ft). You can mitigate that by keeping the engine in its relatively small and high power band (somewhat impractial in daily driving), or you can add forced induction (not cheap).

Now, I'd never assert that a Cooper S is faster than an S2000 by virtue of its better torque numbers, but I've known a few folks who own S2000s, and they've said the 'fun to drive' factor just isn't there around town--for me, a large part of the MCS's 'fun factor' comes from its punchiness at almost any RPM. As always, ymmv.

Nice read on torque v. hp below.
http://vettenet.org/torquehp.html

Side note: I drove Hondas for ten years, ending with a '95 Civic EX coupe. Great cars, but towards the end, I just started feeling like Honda was building in obsolescence. After all, building cars that go 350k+ miles without major work, Honda weren't doing a lot of frequent, repeat business. My well cared-for '95 was plagued by mechanical problems at 70k miles that none of my three CRX-Sis had @ 200k+. Something to think about anyway.

 

That's just an ignorant statement. Read up on your Mini history.

 

I thikn the reason this engine ended up in the MINI was an economics and schedule-driven decision, not a technical decision. It was an engine that was available, fit the engine bay, and had the hp target of the marketeers.

Purchase of subassemblies that are not design-specific to a particular car but that fit is more of a Euro tradition. Honda makes different design vs buy decisions and consequently brings cars with different attributes to market.

As for expecting more than the Cooper engine with a supercharger bolted on, wasn't the price difference between a 2002 Cooper and a 2002 S about the cost of a supercharger, I/C and inlet plumbing and the manufacturing time to install the same, ie the supercharger hardware? It wasn't like they stuck an "M" badge on it and raised the price 30% for market separation.

 

some people just dont listen,
I told you what the S stands for if you dont believe me research it,
but dont **** on me without some facts.

 

Here's a quick table from Edmunds just to see how the Mini engine lines up. I think the take-away here is that the Mini holds its own pretty well. The VVT engines can provide more power, but that is pretty high end RPM power and not as "usable" for a daily driver. Case in point - I really enjoyed test driving the Matrix XRS. Fun car. But it really was gutless until you hit 6500 RPM and the "lift" kicked in, then you finally had some power. Compare that with the PT Cruiser engine with turbo which puts out some respectable torque. Now peak at the Subaru - a car that combines the VVT and turbo to put out some amazing power.

All are good options, but chosen for specific reasons. VVT helps build high end power but it ALSO helps manage emissions more carefully, something manufacturers have to account for these days. The PT Cruiser would benefit greatly from some weight reduction though. That is one heavy car.

(Note engines are listed smallest to biggest displacement!)


Mini Cooper S 1.6L, SOHC, supercharger
168 hp @ 6000 rpm 162 ft-lbs. @ 4000 rpm


Toyota Matrix XRS / Corolla XRS 1.8L, DOHC, VVT
164 hp @ 7600 rpm 125 ft-lbs. @ 4400 rpm


Honda Civic Si 2.0L, DOHC, VVT
197 hp @ 7800 rpm 139 ft-lbs. @ 6100 rpm


PT Cruiser 2.4L, DOHC, turbo (3,800 weight!!!)
230 hp @ 5100 rpm 245 ft-lbs. @ 2800 rpm


Subaru WRX 2.5L, DOHC, turbo, VVT
300 hp @ 6000 RPM 300 ft-lbs. @ 4000 rpm

 

A power plant worthy of the "S" badge?

Didn't the original 970 S make something like 65 hp? The 1071 S I believe made 70 hp and the 1275 S in the ballpark of 76hp. The 1275 ran the 0-60 in 11.2 sec, the 1/4 mile in around 18 sec ........Chrisneal and the Professor are quite correct in pointing out that none of these barn-burners had a supercharger on them.

So............I think the 02 through 06 "S" powerplant is quite worthy in light of those heady performance numbers.

 

You have what you have. Deal with it. Or buy something else. Is reality lost on some of you? MINI ain't Burger King.

If you simply MUST have VVT, go buy a classic mini and do the VTEC conversion. Those look like fun!

 

Not true, there are oil squirters in the pistons, which are supplied by Mahle.
I'll get a picture up soon

 

to a 65 Mustang guy.....

Matt

 

The CURRENT MCS engine is a pretty sophisticated piece of equipment.

Forged Crank
Forged Rods
Oil cooled pistons
Oversize pump to handle piston cooling
Thin neck inconel valves.

Add a Supercharger, Intercooler and 6 speed Gertag to that list, and I wonder how they make money on the difference in price between the MC and the MCS.

Highest ouput and lowest pollution, best economy of engines in the same displacement.


Article with out visuals.
http://www.mini2.com/pdf/mcs_powertrain_us.pdf


Graphs and pictures are at
http://www.mini2.com/pdf/mcs_powertrain_de.pdf


As for DOHC vs SOHC, Since there is no VVT, the reason to go DOHC is to be able to independently set the angle of the Intake and Exhaust valves into the head. It makes no difference to timing or lift as long as the cam is properly designed. DOHC has two cams and associated sprockets and bearings to deal with. The way Tritec has set up the head, they obviously don't feel that the extra cost, and size of the head are worth the benefit.

The fact that "simple and cheap" external changes like intakes, headers, and exhaust do not individually yield much HP shows that the stock components do a pretty good job.

Just my Opinion.
John

 

Who put a small Rover V8 in the new mini. Looked factory, did a nice job, but I can't find the link anymore....

Matt

ps, if you thought room was tight now....

 

Excellent points. The Mini was never about brute HP. It was a nimble, scrappy underdog that found other, more fun and economical ways to win rallies. You guys that are complaining about the car not coming with 200+ HP stock are missing the whole point. Personally, I think that if the non-S Cooper gets a turbo, that would be a travesty. However, since MINI is obviously powerless even to ignore idiots whining about cupholders and storage space, it'll probably happen.

 

I heard that about you!

 

were competitive in class at 32 HP. Up from the factory 26 or something....

It's not what you got, it's how you use it!

Matt

 

Hey..... the cupholder was a complete screw-up for the NA market. maybe the only thing they drink in europe are 12oz cans

I say this because it is to-date the ONLY real complaint I have with the design of the car

 

then sell your mini and buy something else. My engine is just grand thanks and I'll not compare it to a Honda engine or any other. It is what it is.