R50/53 M MIni 300 hp
Originally Posted by CooperSigma
I agree 100%.
I was highly dissappointed to hear that there wasn't a bigger engine going into the new Mini. I don't care HOW big of a turbo you put on it, the bottom line is that the small displacement will ultimately hold you back if you're looking for good downlow power.
Yes, for low end torque a 400 ci stroker may be preferrable.
Originally Posted by lhoboy
So how do you explain the 2200 cc 1000 hp formula 1 cars?
Yes, for low end torque a 400 ci stroker may be preferrable.
Yes, for low end torque a 400 ci stroker may be preferrable.
Also, F1 cars weight what, half of what our Minis do? They're able to properly perform so well because of that. I'd like to see an F1 engine in say, a WRC car and THEN let's see what it can do.
In conclusion, I was generalizing with street use in mind.
Consider this, if the "no replacement for displacement" wasn't true, then why has Suburu upped the size of their boxer engines in the last few iterations? The Rex used to have a 2.0 block, but since they know their customers want more grunt, those cars now come with the 2.5 block. Hell, the STi comes with a 3.0 block, why? Because they know the customers want low-end power.
So, I will admit that I stand by my statement that if our engines had a bigger engine to begin with, they'd be a hell of a lot faster.
Originally Posted by mybroscoop
The wrx has a 2.0 liter block and the STI has a 2.5 liter block. They do make 3.0 liter H6 though, slap a turbo on that and lets see what it can do! 
But yes, they've put the 2.5 in the '06 Rexes.
I don't think the M division would even think about doing a MINI.
To qualify to become an M car, it must:
- be RWD
- have a manual tranmission, but now we are seeing SMGs.
That is why the X5 4.8 is not an M car, due to its being AWD, and having an automatic tranny.
To qualify to become an M car, it must:
- be RWD
- have a manual tranmission, but now we are seeing SMGs.
That is why the X5 4.8 is not an M car, due to its being AWD, and having an automatic tranny.
Originally Posted by zerofighter
I don't think the M division would even think about doing a MINI.
To qualify to become an M car, it must:
- be RWD
- have a manual tranmission, but now we are seeing SMGs.
That is why the X5 4.8 is not an M car, due to its being AWD, and having an automatic tranny.
To qualify to become an M car, it must:
- be RWD
- have a manual tranmission, but now we are seeing SMGs.
That is why the X5 4.8 is not an M car, due to its being AWD, and having an automatic tranny.
Originally Posted by MCLeonard
I'd be happy with 200whp if they would also shed about 600lbs. Drop weight and everything else works better too, brakes, springs, turning, and of course acceleration. I have a vehicle that makes only 125 hp. 0-60 in 3 seconds, top speed 160mph. Turns and brakes like nothing else. Weighs 600lbs with me on board. I think we have seen that the 4 cyl can put out 200hp. I just wish they would offer a stripper model MINI that was lighter. What really gets me is these show cars that have high power but they have added 1000lbs of sound gear. It really is all about power to weight.
Originally Posted by pcnorton
Very simply, they don't have to last but one race before a rebuild.
Whats that in miles?
Paul
Whats that in miles?Paul
Originally Posted by lhoboy
Try pushing your JCW MCS (or mine) at full throttle for more than a couple hours and you'll be rebuilding your engine as well. The biggest difference in the Formula engines is the size and strength of the components. The crankshaft, for example, has the cross section rivaling that of an eighteen wheeler. Of course, the smaller displacement engines generate the big power at engine speeds well above 10,000 rpm. "Low end" power can be managed with gearing. I could go on and on. Use a small displacement, use a large displacement engine. You can achieve massive power any which way, reliably! You have to design the entire system to get both, not just tweak one parameter (ie. stuff in a larger engine).
The component of a F1 engine are the lightest possible for the maximum weight to strength ratios. The rev higher faster---more friction. More wear.
Paul
Originally Posted by mtbscott
Sounds like you're all about straightline performance (not that there's anything wrong with that:smile: ), but that's not what the M series of cars is all about. Pumping out 300 hp through the front wheels in a heavily front-weight biased car would never meet the handling/braking dynamics of the straight line acceleration.
Originally Posted by pcnorton
Sorry don't buy it. There is a huge difference between an engine operation at the high efficiency of F1 engines and the detuned JCW Works. Much less stress. Even at full throttle the stress on the Mini components are way less.
The component of a F1 engine are the lightest possible for the maximum weight to strength ratios. The rev higher faster---more friction. More wear.
Paul
The component of a F1 engine are the lightest possible for the maximum weight to strength ratios. The rev higher faster---more friction. More wear.
Paul
GOOD ON MATE!!!
Originally Posted by dominicminicoopers
Is that a statement of fact or a statement of your opinion? 
Think what you want, however, I must interject, as others have in other threads, that the throttle pedel in the MINI Cooper is NOT an On/Off switch.
Again, each is entitled to an opinion, and I'll go happily thru the twisties in my 300hp+ front-wheel-drive MCS by pushing my proportional throttle pedal to the correct angle to achieve proper traction for the condition of the road.
Motor On!

Think what you want, however, I must interject, as others have in other threads, that the throttle pedel in the MINI Cooper is NOT an On/Off switch.
Again, each is entitled to an opinion, and I'll go happily thru the twisties in my 300hp+ front-wheel-drive MCS by pushing my proportional throttle pedal to the correct angle to achieve proper traction for the condition of the road.
Motor On!
Originally Posted by dominicminicoopers
The amount of HP a car's engine has, has NOTHING to do with how well the car handles. Suspension component settings, tire choice, total weight of car, and overall weight distribution does.
- How can the HP dictate how a spring expands, or how a shock absorber compresses?
- How does the HP rating change ride height or skew the geometery of the suspension system?
- How does the HP rating modify the stickyness of your tires?
Originally Posted by effusant
First, generally speaking, engines that make more power will be heavier.That will have the effects of pushing the weight balance forward of center as well as changing how the suspension moves (more weight will lower the period of oscillation).
People who are adding a turbo, aren't adding much more than 30 kilos of weight into the engine compartment.
Originally Posted by effusant
Next, having more torque and power causes the weight to shift.
Originally Posted by effusant
Ever see an old truck with a huge v8 and a twisted bed? A powerful engine can turn a frame. Even a moderately built engine will usually be able to twist a car enough for the suspension to respond. Try goosing the throttle while not in gear.
Originally Posted by effusant
You will feel the car move. And finally, when you're handling close to the limit of the suspension, the engine can push you past the limits of traction, if not properly controlled.
Originally Posted by effusant
And then there's torque steer, too. Differentials tend to put more power through one wheel or the other. It has to do with the design of the planetary gears inside, and shouldn't be much of an issue with a limited slip diff. IIRC, this will push one side of the car slightly faster than the other, effectively steering away from the side getting the power.
Anything else where you can attribute an engines power to suspension handling?
Originally Posted by Ryephile
Mitsubishi and Subaru don't count, eh?
Originally Posted by Ryephile
Ok, what would you prefer to see? After all, throwing out ideas IS the point of this thread!
Of course, I'd like to have a 300HP 2000lb mini - which will also never happen - but if it ever did, the cost would be so high that I wouldn't buy one anyway. The closer the cost gets to 30K, the more likely I am to buy an S2000/Evo/STi. The closer the cost gets to 40K, the more likely I am to buy an Elise.
Realistically, mini COULD have put a decent engine in the car at the same pricepoint. There are plenty of 4 cylinder engines making this power without forced induction. Either go that route and lower the price, or keep the FI and shoot for low 200's (think Cobalt SS, Ion Redline, SRT) . They could even have increased fuel efficiency at the same time if they'd wanted to. I can only conclude that chose not to, which sucks.
I've always thought that dumbing down cars to justify a price point is a bad idea. Then again, what do I know... people are already spending much more money on these cars than I ever thought they would. Of course, those people typically are the ones buying a "unique" car, not a "performance" car.
Originally Posted by JeffS
...Sorry, I guess I should just let the dreamers dream. My "dream" would be a 200HP 2000lb mini. -- which will never happen.
--- About 4 years ago I was a little bummed to learn that our little cars were actually quite portly... While 2,000 pounds is doable for our MINI, it will be gutted and stripped-out big time. I'm rapidly approaching 2,400 lbs though, and I'm incrementing upwards to 240 bhp. Quite happy with the results thus far...
Realistically, mini COULD have put a decent engine in the car at the same pricepoint. There are plenty of 4 cylinder engines making this power without forced induction. Either go that route and lower the price, or keep the FI and shoot for low 200's (think Cobalt SS, Ion Redline, SRT) . They could even have increased fuel efficiency at the same time if they'd wanted to. I can only conclude that chose not to, which sucks.
--- Not too sure about fitment of those engines, but the Cobalt one (I think Ecotec) would have been nice for sure as it already has a butt-load of tuning options. As far as NA, the Mazda 2.3 engine like in the Mazda 3's would have been cool. I guess this is also Ford these days, so it would be the Duratec. Cosworth has done much with these engines... 260 bhp, and still NA if I'm not mistaken! The Caterham 260 utilizes this baby... Again, fitment, hard to say what all was considered, and the trade-offs made. In a FWD car with a short wheel base, more and more uumph is not always the best solution I suppose...
I've always thought that dumbing down cars to justify a price point is a bad idea. Then again, what do I know... people are already spending much more money on these cars than I ever thought they would. Of course, those people typically are the ones buying a "unique" car, not a "performance" car.
--- For a sub $20k car (my MCS MSRP was 19 something), I would bet that the MINI has lured owners with more disposable income and with average salaries above that of any car in this price range. I generally don't make such bold statements, but I truly believe this to be accurate. If so, when one is willing and able, things happen. On the right track, with an investment of $5k (give or take), the MINI will more than hold its own. Think onasled at Lime Rock. Showed my pop that vid yesterday with him at LR with the Porsches
--- About 4 years ago I was a little bummed to learn that our little cars were actually quite portly... While 2,000 pounds is doable for our MINI, it will be gutted and stripped-out big time. I'm rapidly approaching 2,400 lbs though, and I'm incrementing upwards to 240 bhp. Quite happy with the results thus far...
Realistically, mini COULD have put a decent engine in the car at the same pricepoint. There are plenty of 4 cylinder engines making this power without forced induction. Either go that route and lower the price, or keep the FI and shoot for low 200's (think Cobalt SS, Ion Redline, SRT) . They could even have increased fuel efficiency at the same time if they'd wanted to. I can only conclude that chose not to, which sucks.
--- Not too sure about fitment of those engines, but the Cobalt one (I think Ecotec) would have been nice for sure as it already has a butt-load of tuning options. As far as NA, the Mazda 2.3 engine like in the Mazda 3's would have been cool. I guess this is also Ford these days, so it would be the Duratec. Cosworth has done much with these engines... 260 bhp, and still NA if I'm not mistaken! The Caterham 260 utilizes this baby... Again, fitment, hard to say what all was considered, and the trade-offs made. In a FWD car with a short wheel base, more and more uumph is not always the best solution I suppose...
I've always thought that dumbing down cars to justify a price point is a bad idea. Then again, what do I know... people are already spending much more money on these cars than I ever thought they would. Of course, those people typically are the ones buying a "unique" car, not a "performance" car.
--- For a sub $20k car (my MCS MSRP was 19 something), I would bet that the MINI has lured owners with more disposable income and with average salaries above that of any car in this price range. I generally don't make such bold statements, but I truly believe this to be accurate. If so, when one is willing and able, things happen. On the right track, with an investment of $5k (give or take), the MINI will more than hold its own. Think onasled at Lime Rock. Showed my pop that vid yesterday with him at LR with the Porsches
Originally Posted by dominicminicoopers
waa waa waa
Originally Posted by effusant
I didn't say a capable driver can't control more power. I replied to your questions of how tweaking and engine for more power can affect the operation of the suspension.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
igzekyativ
MINIs & Minis for Sale
28
Dec 23, 2015 10:36 AM




