which is better 1.6 vs 1.6s

 

Better for what?

 

What? They are the same minus a turbo.

 

If you are talking about GEN1 cars.....
Not quite....while they share the same BASIC desgin...there are numerous changes to the block and head to allow it to deal with the extra power and stress of a SC motor. To call them the same is like calling then twins...but they are more like cousins!!
The blocks are NOT interchangeable or the same....just similar.
Both motors are good....it just depends on what you are looking for....both are basic, low tech, single overhead cam, cast iron alloy block motors.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tritec_engine

Some pretty good info on the motors....Tritec factory site had a great few terrific pages on the changes done to allow the SC...but since they have been sold, and the entire factory moved to China from Brazil, the site is long-gone. If i remember right, the changes included things like oil galleries,bearings, external mounting points, etc. The pistons, ring arrangements, and heads are very different too......

Both motors have proven themselves to be very solid.....and capable of handling huge increases in HP.....With the "S" motor more easily/more commonly modded.

The weak point if you will are on the cars and the attached systems....Transmissions on the std cooper are kinda weak, with the Midlands 5 speed, while being adequate, does not last long when driven aggressively, or on a car with a few extra HP. The CVT on the cooper...don't go there...don't get me started....consider it a failed experiment....it was before its time, and needs a few more years of development and reliability testing....repairs are not possible....and replacements cost around $7000!!
On the "S", the 6 speed tranny is great, the auto, a conventional 6 speed while not the best performer, in pretty reliable. But on the "S" it has a superchager...and it drives the waterpump using a PTO off the bottom of the SC...and the SC has proven to be a reliability issue....while not super common....the SC does fail...and it cost $$ to get a new/rebuilt unit and install it.

When all is said.....it comes down to do you want an auto, and do you want "performance" or a good MPG car? The cars are very much alike beyond the motors, trannys, and a few suspension variations.

Now if you are talking about GEN2 cars.....I'll let someone answer that!!

 

[/qoute] The CVT on the cooper...don't go there...don't get me started....consider it a failed experiment....it was before its time, and needs a few more years of development and reliability testing....repairs are not possible....and replacements cost around $7000!![quote/]

Blame Nissan for that. In all a great idea but, a failed design from the get go. Should be better with time. With the r56 it is the Prince EP6 and EP6DT (TPH150 and TPH175 for the MINI) it is the same block with roughly the smae design but the turbocharged version has been beefed up to handle the turbo. Overall in design from the Tritec(1st gen) and Prince(2nd gen), the Prince has been slightly more reliable. But being that it is also younger we haven't had the opprotunity to see any long term failures. But they are adding Valvetronic to the refresh soon, and even though most of the MINI folks thing that is a bad idea they don't see the advantages of having that system. Granted this is also the same people that think a intake and exhaust should net them 20+ hp. When it really comes down to what is better Tritec or Prince it really depends on what you want S/C or turbo. I like my turbo but I can respect those wo have the S/C. Also just to poke fun at all those who have the Tritec your motor is in a PT Cruiser so in fact you drive a PT Cruiser.

 

Also just to poke fun at all those who have the Tritec your motor is in a PT Cruiser so in fact you drive a PT Cruiser. [/quote]

Why did you have to spoil it for me...

 

Why blame Nissan? CVT transmissions are used with success on many smaller cars around the world. It's just in the US/North America that they haven't caught on. If the one in the Mini was more or less a disaster, I'm sure it was that particular execution and not anything to do with CVT's in general. My wife and I have a Nissan Murano. 4000+ lbs, 245 HP, 245 ft/lbs of torque. And a CVT. It works great. Flawlessly. Sure, it's not a performance automatic, but it's not meant to be. But what it does do, it does well. And that's keep the engine in it's optimum operating RPM for any given speed. That improves gas mileage. And reduces engine wear. I can cruise at 75 to 80 mph on the freeway and the engine is not even turning 2000 rpm. And when I want to accellerate fast, I floor it, the engine goes to 6000 rpm which is its peak power level and the transmission does the work of changing the ratios while the engine maintains maximum power. It's really a nifty idea for many vehicles. 'Course I still love the Getrag in my JCW.

 

There have been lots of failures of CVTs in Nissans as well. You can browse around the web and find just as many Nissan CVT failures (if not more, because there are more Nissans on the road) as MINI CVT failures. I own a (now failing) MINI CVT and have done a lot of research...so far, CVTs overall are just not there as far as reliability. I'm sure that someday they will come around, but right now the concept as a whole is just not fine-tuned enough to be in production as far as I'm concerned.

However, this thread is about engines and not transmissions. I agree largely with the statements that the engines, justa vs S, are the same (either generation) with the caveat that the Ses are beefed up a little to handle the extra power from the peripherals (SC in 1st gen, turbo in 2nd gen).

 

The reason I blame Nissan even though I am a Nissan fan is because they developed the CVT with Renault. BMW bought the design from Nissan and weel they are flawed big time.

 

just get a v8 in that car bra, youll has tons of power then.