Hey Everyone,

We have an 03 MCS that we've had for about 2 weeks now. We've been upgrading a few things and have done the normal oil change, filter changes, etc.....

We have a pulley coming and a couple other goodies, but mostly have only done cosmetic things so far.

What I wanted to know is....

Is the R53 a lot slower than an R56 in a straight line? Our R53 seems to lag until it hits about 2500 RPM. We drove an 09 Clubman from Mini of Madison, WI, while ours was getting warranty work done and it seemed WAY faster than our Mini.

I thought with the supercharger, the horsepower difference was minimal. And being belt driven, I didn't think I would notice any lag. The Clubman was an automatic and I think it is faster than our MCS. I know ours has quite a few miles on it, but can someone give me some stats on factory R53s and factory R56s?

I'd love to know comparable horsepower, torque and 0-60mph and quarter mile times if possible.

Thanks so much!

 

2010 Clubman S
hp: 172 @ 5500
torque: 177 @ 1600
0-60: 7.0 seconds manual
0-60: 7.2 seconds auto
source: miniusa

2003 MCS
hp: 163
torque: 155
0-60: 6.7 seconds
source: carspecsdirectory.com

The turbo S makes maximum torque at very low rpms.

 

And the early years had a higher first and second gear which is slower getting off the line.

And a car will get a bit slower the more miles are put on it.

 

From Edmunds, 2003 Cooper S:
Torque: 155 ft-lbs, Max Torque: 4000 rpm
(compare to 1600 rpm for the 2010)

You have to rev up a 2003 a lot more to get the torque out of it. Low end torque makes a big difference in the feeling of power and speed, especially in street driving.

 

I track my R53, and a track buddy of mine tracks his R56. He has more torque in the higher gears, and pulls away from me in the straights, with both cars at WOT.

 

I dont believe this for a second. For one thing, compare the same models, not 10 Clubbie to a 03 coupe. Apple and orange here. They are different cars, with Clubman slightly heavier.

Also there's NO way a stock 2003 MCS is 3 to 5 tenths of a second faster in 0-60 than a stock R56. Plus the numbers for the manual vs stock seem wrong; in my track times I have seen R56 autos consistently pull slightly faster 0-60 and SQM times than their manual variants. They just shift faster, with no loss of boost between shifts.

 

Now, now...Don't kill the messenger. I drove a Clubman, so this was the exact information that I was looking for. Thanks for all the input. I guess I'll have to keep tweaking our car and get it wicked fast like a lot of the R53s on here.

 

Bad driver. A good driver will drive a manual faster then an automatic. 9 times out of 10

 

My old '02 MCS did not come on until about 3000 RPM. When I had the 15% pulley installed and tune done, it started to pull hard around 2000 RPM. My current '06 MCS, with the teflon-coated rotors and slightly better tune ('05-'06 models), also pulled hard from 2000 RPM on. All the mods I have now just make that all the more better.

You will have to do some forum searching. The 1st-gen MINIs can pull hard all the way to 7000 RPM. 2nd-gen MINIs top out lower, around 6000 RPM. To get an idea of how well each does, you will need to check some of the dyno sheets to see how the power band pans out. Beyond that, the 0-60 or 1/4 miles times can be improved by driver.

 

Curious as to ideal launch RPM range for a R53, to obtain optimal performance times?

 

Agreed. Of course, we're talking street cars. The cars that are run at a drag race that are automatics are WICKED fast and made to stomp a manual. But, those are tens of thousands of dollars to build.


As far as a launch, I have found that a bit over 2500rpms gives me a good launch with very little bog, then the supercharger kicks in. Of course, it all depends on what you do to the throttle after the clutch is let out completely that will mark your times. If the tires are chirping too much, you are wasting energy.....and rubber.

 

disagree. these were all experienced manual/stick drivers that knew the track, and even they were amazed by how fast the automatic MCS, in all its slushbox glory, consistently finished faster--not much, several tenths of a second at the most--but still beat 'em. All except the driver with the factory JCW.

And I'll say it again: no boost loss between shifts, and U think the Sport mode does wonders for manual MCS's, it's even more pronounced on the autos. Drive one and y'll see.

 

^
The auto vs. manual has mostly favored the auto on a turbo car. I used to see this a lot in the 300ZX twin turbo. The autos hold boost with shifts while the manuals have to rebuild boost.

 

I guess if you flat pedal shift it, you don't have to worry about boost.

And our transmissions are a lot cheaper to replace.

I drove a Clubman S Auto and it was seriously fast. Holy cow. They have come a long way with the autos since our 2005.

 

Stock to stock they are very close. The R56 has the edge with low end torque and is slightly faster overall. Both are great cars!

 

my 05 MCS with DSC on vs my friends 08 MCS with DSC off. from a stop i pulled about half a car then he caught up and by 110 i was on his rear bumper accelerating at the same speed. both stock except he has a blow off valve(actually his girlfriends car )

but apparently he said my car handles much better then the turbo . . . motor on supercharged MCS!

 

You only lose boost with a manual if you lift your foot in between shifts. Keep you foot planted and shift fast enough, and you keep it going.

 

Just a reminder folks. Talks of street racing is not permitted on NAM. Keep the talk of speed trials to track related tests please.