I think the JCW stuff is generally pretty cool provided your wallet can support it. I mean, it's tough to argue with factory proven parts that maintain your warranty and give your MINI a little more "go". Or so I thought...

Here's what Road & Track has to say regarding a 2003 MCS vs. a 2006 MCS JCW. Get this: the 2006 JCW-equipped car takes LONGER to stop from 60mph and has LESS grip on the skidpad. Because the data likely are within the margin of error the actual differences are meaningless... it's a tie!

This means the JCW option adds at least $7k (with brakes and suspension) to the price of your MCS for NO appreciable improvement in performance -- other than acceleration. And how much of the improvement in acceleration is due to gearing changes after MY'05? (A stock '06 MCS goes 0-60 in 6.8 secs according to the MINIUSA website, so you cut 0.5 secs off your time...) Is this all there is? How can this be?

2003 MCS
0 - 60 mph: 7.7 sec
Braking from 60 mph: 121 feet
Braking from 80 mph: 217 feet
Skidpad: 0.87 g
Slalom Speed: n/a
Source: http://www.roadandtrack.com/article....&page_number=1

2006 MCS JCW
0 - 60 mph: 6.3 secs
Braking from 60 mph: 122 feet
Braking from 80 mph: 226 feet
Skipad: 0.86 g
Slalom Speed: 66.2 mph
Source: http://www.roadandtrack.com/assets/d...data_panel.pdf

 

Did both cars weigh the same, have the same options and the same wheels and tires? I always wonder if they account for things like that in side by side tests.

 

Eval - Here's what you get from Road & Track:

The 2003 MCS ran 17" S-Lights with 205/45/17 tires. It had 163 hp.

The 2006 MCS JCW ran 18" JCW wheels with 205/40/18 tires. It reported 207 hp.

Granted, both sets of wheels/tires are anchors for acceleration... but the 18"s should have had an edge in cornering. Braking might be marginally better for the 17"s, but certainly the JCW brake kit should perform better for that kind of dough.

 

Those are some really crapcastic numbers!

Is ist worth it?

Some crap is good.
Some crap is great!
Other crap is just crap.

Like everything else is your personal preference.
Those performance numbers could be achived with aftermarket parts for less $$$
But then you would not get all of those crappy badges.

If I would have bought my Mini, I would have bought the JCW.
Way more expensive, but way more crap.

IHO

 

Sorry I'm not up to reading through it right this sec but you see what I mean: its easy to put numbers on paper but the variables can make a difference even if its the fact that the 03 has better tires or is lighter, etc. Frankly I can't see how the 18s would help the JCW at all, I think its just one of the for looks only add-ons that JCW seems to be increasingly involved in for the $$ (like the leather dash and all that).

 

Let's not forget that last year MotorTrend tested the 2005 MCS (non-works) in the compact car shoot out.

0-60 was a meere 6.4s

Who needs mods! Stock Rocks

 

I was going to get the JCW package but decided against it. My warranty will only last 2 years IF THAT! Probably 1 1/2 years. So that argument is out the window. Plus a 19% pulley will give you a gain of 25hp for 400$ installed. So 25hp for $400 or 40hp for $6000? Doesnt make any sence! lol but its still sweet!

 

As for the acceleration, the gain you get from the JCW tuning is the same gain you get from the '05+ gearing, having made those changes in that order to my '02.
0-60s
2002 Stock: 7.7s
with JCW: 7.0s
with '05 trans & JCW: 6.3s

I can't really speak to the difference in the handling, but a lot may have to do with the fact that the '06 car is on Dunlop all-seasons and the '03 is on Pirelli performance tires.

 

WELL SAID!

 

Just to add some more lighter fluid..... Fixed it for ya.

Source: CLICKY It's from the same test, all the numbers match up. (Just follow the link at the bottom of your link and download the data panel picture link on the first page).

From page 4 of the 2nd link....."The centrifuge trophy goes to the Mini, with 0.87g of lateral grip, accomplished with Pirellis that have a 180 tread wear number — on the sticky side. And the Cooper S, a veritable slot car in the slalom, becomes the new record-holder; its manic 69.5-mph blitz deposes the Porsche 911 GT2, at 68.7."

 

Wow, you guys really don't get it.

The whole thread on JCW is CRAP was started by Mikey who was asking a legitimate question. Basically, some ppl believe JCW to be CRAP because your paying $6K plus when aftermarket you pay less than half of that and might be quicker. yes, you get a warranty.

That is what its all about ... not about a bunch of numbers in a magazine, Its cost/benefit ratio. If you can live without the warranty ... then JCW is CRAP.

The JCW is CRAP thread has NOTHING to do about who "great" JCW is ... rather, its about what a RIPOFF it is.

If you really want to talk about times, magazines beat the hell out of those cars. Take a look a the Lotus Elise threads some time

Factory claims 0 -60 4.9. This irritates some owners who can't emulate those times. One mag publishes 0 -60 in 4.4 and they go nuts. What they DON'T tell you is they were doing 8K launches and, most likely, the next mag who got the car had no clutch. Some mags actually show slower 0 - 60 times and admit the clutch was beat and worn.

Numbers don't mean squat unless YOU can do the same without breaking your car.

 

Amen, from a fellow crapper!

 

Oh piffle! Those are just numbers......the numbers do not reflect the pedigree that accompanies a JCW MCS or the smoothness and refinement of the JCW package - so there!

What those pesky performance numbers don't show is that in 10 years an 06 JCW MCS will bring a hefty $4,500.00 at trade in time, while a modded car or stock 06 MCS will bring in a paltry $3,200.00.

So put that in your pipe and smoke it.

 

Amen.

See how fast an Evo or an STI will hit 60 without smoking the clutch.............

 

Wait until your dealer refuses to fix your malfunctioning steering or leaky AC because he notices that you put that unpedigreed 19% pulley on.

If a 40 hp gain translates into marginal performance increases (as indicated in this thread), why risk your warranty over a measley 25 hp bump? Especially one that some tuners even don't recommend?

 

So who's planning on selling? I like my Crap.

 

Calm down , now! We do get it. Some of us just like to beat the numbers to death. If any of us were truly worried about the cost/benefit equation, we wouldn't be Team Craptastic members.

 

The resale value thingy comes up on these JCW discussion topics.

It never fails to amuse me - some people think an 06 JCW with the Checkmate package and the piano dash will be selling at Hemi-Cuda prices at the 2030 Barrett-Jackson auction series.

Well, maybe not the JCW but definately the MC40.

 

Under federal law they can't do that. (They could if you changed the drive pulley)

 

Chows - You actually are nailing one the points I was trying to make by comparing apples to apples (as much as that is possible with different model year MINIs running different wheel/tire combos) by using data from the same magazine. I totally agree that magazine numbers rarely -- if ever -- reflect real life driving. That said, I figure that since they thrash cars for a living they likely mistreated both of these cars equally. The point is not the absolute numbers... its the comparison. And from a comparative perspective the performance between the MCS and the MCS JCW is very similar once gearing changes are taken into account.

So, for a moment, let's forget hypothetical resale values in 10 or 20 years. Let's not worry if you can get more bang-for-the buck today by piecing together a bunch of aftermarket parts compared to the JCW package. Let's simply try to understand whether the JCW package actually improves the performance of the car.

When I was looking for data to start this thread it was for one purpose only: to compare braking distances for the standard MCS vs. the JCW upgrade. MINIs website and printed propaganda makes a big deal out of the package, but they don't provide ANY data. It's all marketing fluff. So for me -- and only for me, not for anyone else -- the JCW crap is craptastic... I'm just not really expecting huge performance gains from it.

Now if we want to have a discussion of crap vs. bling we should start a new thread. In the meantime, JCW is crap. And I love it.

 

ROFL. Obviously you havent read https://www.northamericanmotoring.co...477#post823477

Lets see what you can do with MM that Skiploader could not.

PirateTim ... After reading those mags for more years than I can remember, I rank em ... car&driver, Motor Trend, and R&T in order of thrashing them up to more normal driving. In other words, car and driver numbers are usually always lower.

the other thing to consider is that some companies are conservative in their numbers. If Porsche says 4.9, you can bet that they all do that or better. Others may be "overenthusiastic" in their estimates and dump the clutch at high rpms like you may never do.

As to if JCW is better than stock ... clearly the TC gets you a half sec. In the mid 6 range you CAN feel that. If your talking say the diffence between a 4.9 car (an Elise) and a 5.1 car (Boxster S) I would bet you could never tell the difference and get different results all the time. But, the difference between say a 4.6 car (911S and a 5.1 car) ... 1/2 would probably be pretty big because the numbers are much lower.

As to braking and suspension ... you need to read what Michael Cooper WROTE concerning these issues. He wasn't out to create a race car. He wanted all the parts to work together in harmony. Motoringfile.com and a good article on the suspension and what the test engineers says about the feel of the car on winding roads vice stock. Its the flow of the holistic car ... Your correct in that they do NOT give numbers. JCW wont even give you specs ...

 

Well the last Hemi-Cuda sold was a convertable for a cool $1M. Since babyboomers are just buying the cars the couldnt afford as teenagers the market has exploded. The bottom will also drop out just as it dropped out in exotics because Everything in life goes in cycles ... up and down. When that bottom drops out, those million dollar Hemi ppl will be crying the same blues as the ppl who bought the million dollar Ferraris.

Now the MINI is another thing all together ... you left out the KILLER APP (err , application ... JCW AND MC40)

2 Million easy

 

So I should have gotten the piano dash instead of the standard space blue checkmate dash? Aw man, there goes my retirement...POOF!

I guess I'll just go drive it into the ground now and throw some money back into the 401k.

Think my sportlink will make up for it?

 

Exactly the point I make when people make a big deal about they think they can drive so much faster in a manual vs an auto - the reality is that real world driving which is a combination of driver skill, conditions/environment and real use of the car vs the abuse testers exact on a car has different results then specs and published figures would have you believe (like your mileage will vary..). Its also funny about how much weight people give these numbers when the reality is that satisfying performance has a lot to do with how the handling is and where the power is for how you drive and the type of circumstances you encounter the most which has nothing to do with some numbers a tester has flogged out of a car.

Anyway, I still think that tire type, wear, car options and total weight (w/driver & gasoline) should be accounted for and described when attempting to do side by side comparisons and/or publishing numbers for it to approach being thorough as they can make a difference. On top of all this its worth remembering that each engine can start out with a fairly wide discrepancy in HP - another thing the manufactuers do not like addressing when it comes to stated figures.

I understand that people like discussing this and perhaps in my ill haze I;m missing something, but after seeing these these types of fractions of seconds hashed over time and time again the premise just seems highly flawed and not of real value. Driving what your interested in and determining if you think its worth it is the best you can really do - DreadPirateTim, perhaps you should test drive a stock to JCW and do a write-up of what your take is. Just remember, lighter wheels and grippier tires will improve the braking

(wow, i didnt think I wrote all that much!)

 

You've made two points in there worth repeating ...

1. tires make a huge difference. Unfortunately, Joe Smoe don't know tire X from tire Y nor care. They just buy a "car"
2. The variance in engine outputs depends entirely on the market segment. MINI2 was reporting (or ppl posting) a big variance in OEM BHP times for MCS in all years. In other words, some ppl got 155 bhp while others 175 Bhp ... not everyone gets 168. I would venture to believe this variance is inversely proportional to the price of the car. In other words, I doubt a MB will see such a variance.