[quote=bamatt;1589022]It is, I am not trying to be ugly, it is just a feeling I am trying to empart to you...

You're "emparting" a feeling alright, bamatt. You don't seem to have to try.
This string is reminding me WHY I don't come to this forum much anymore.

 

Surfblue replies:
You seem right to me, StGabriel. It's not about what you drive, it's how you drive it and how you adjust your attitude. The lady of the house drives a Yaris hatchback and had several other high mileage low buck commuter cars previous to that and the worst thing she's done is bump a deer off her fender in twenty years. The Yaris is night and day different than a Mini or an S, but you ADAPT and you live. And a regular plain ol Mini is a helluva lot more car than a Yaris, I can assure you. To my mind, the best thing about the difference between the two is the Mini takes the BORING out of the commute.

 

Right on, Dennis, RIGHT ON! - Surfblue

 

It seems to me that the former oh so popular and similarly oh so ugly battle of the R56 vs the older models has now been replaced by this MC vs MCS rage. How about we all just get along, because this is reading pretty silly. Whichever model you're driving, you have no reason to be so darn defensive about it. If you're HAPPY with what you're driving, that's the end of the string. Anybody for warm milk and cookies?? Seriously, let's all just chill out.

 

Sure, the next thing will be

Its not how big your engine is but how high it revs

 

Exactly. But then again if nearly 10 years of internet forum use has taught me anything it's that you'll always find troll-like behavior where people just like to argue and stir things up. Doesn't matter if they are wrong or right. They'll defend themselves even once they are past the point of making any sense. Case in point, the last comment made to me. I found that pretty amusing. All you can do is state your point and then move on. The best way to get rid of a troll is to ignore them. They feed on the attention.

 

She is not a troll

 

Just my .02 cents. I live in portland, OR. and I swear, Rasmussen mini must have designed the test drive route to sell more of the mcs It starts off going up hill, then you are merging onto a notoriously dangerous part of hwy 26 at a rather steep uphill grade. I felt much more confident merging in the s with the additional power when I needed it. The car seems perfect for the occasional trip I need to make to the oregon coast, with lots of steep hills and all the power I need to get there in the mcs, it will be a fun drive. get what you want and be happy with it, that's all that matters imho.

 

Did someone say milk and cookies!!!!!!!

 

[quote]=dneal;1589218]But the engine is built with stronger innards to handle that.[quote]

I'm guessing the parts aren't necessarily stronger just better quality ie lighter weight, higher heat tolerance, etc,. Even if the parts are physicaly "stronger" and the lifespan is equal to the non-turbo the premium you will pay to replace the "stronger" parts I'm guessing will be in the 33% range.

Uh, like the more complicated Valvetronic system? Lemme see... the S doesn't have that.

I'm guessing you were being fecious but if not, I meant the intercooler, waste gate, turbo, exhaust manifold, electronic turbo controls, more expensive ECM, increased number of gaskets, oil/coolant lines and ducts, increased labor costs because the intercooler and/or turbo are in the way,etc,etc

 

I still just say that anyone who has any experience with freeway traffic knows that an obstruction or slow driver in one lane almost immediately affects all other lanes. Have someone come to a dead stop in front of you? Ok -- the whole freeway is going to backup for miles. Getting around him is NOT going to be a problem. You say Atlanta is worse than LA? I can believe that. It just means things will get slower, not faster, though.

I can understand why someone would *want* acceleration -- it's fun and all that. But for safety purposes? Uh, yeah. I still say you're conflating want with need along the lines of the folks who think they "need" to tailgate to prevent people from "cutting them off".

 

I think I said this several times but if your on a twisting two lane where the passing broken lines might be short, there is simply no substitution for QUICKLY getting around a slow moving car in front of you. The quicker you make the pass, the SAFER you will be.

I have owned lots of cars that are as slow (or slower) than a MC. Trying to pass on a two-lane road is NOT fun. It's work and can be dangerous. So dangerous, that most of the time the thought of even trying to pass isn't worth the effort. Way to dangerous. That should not deter you from owning a slow car, only realize its not safe to pass in certain circumstances.

 

Hi chows, just wanted to jump in and add my .02 bhp here. I've been on all sides of the fence. I've owned and/or driven cars that would make most average motorists "have a movement", and probably make quite a few enthusiasts blush like they've never been behind the wheel before.

That being said, as evidenced by my sig, I am the proud owner of a new MC (in transit as we type). I'd be lying through my teeth if I said I didn't want an MCS. It all came down to numbers and compromise with the wife. Am I sad I don't have an MCS? A smidge. Will I be disappointed in the MC? No way!

I think your talk of the underpowered lane-changing scenario (while true), should not only be quantified, but studied. If someone doesn't drive so aggressively that it necessitates a potentially unsafe lane-change, then maybe that driver should rethink their motoring philosophies. Don't get me wrong, I love to get on the loud pedal as much as the next guy, but a measure of common sense and decency should be weighed. Come to think of it, isn't a big part of the "Mini mantra" to be courteous to your fellow motorists?

Case in point. My wife and two children were driving home from MD today. In PA we hit some particularly nasty traffic due to construction. There were a few other drivers who were being particularly nasty, zipping in and out of lanes, tailgating, and just being general nuisances. I was driving my mother-in-law's PT Cruiser (we helped move my sister-in-law down there, I'll never volunteer for that again ) and I was getting on the gas when I could in order to make it home as quickly as we could. I figure the power/weight ratio of the MC is probably better than that of the PT, and the Cruiser seemed to do exactly what it needed to.

I guess all I'm trying to say is that motorists should tailor their habits to the particular vehicle they are in. You don't try and take a Honda Fit on the Indianapolis Motor Speedway any more than you'd likely take an F1 race car down to the corner to get a gallon of milk. At the end of the day, it boils down to owner satisfaction, doesn't matter what anyone else thinks or says.

 

Boss ... Welcome to NAM

I agree with you!

My point of that was simply its safer to pass quickly on a two lane. That's all.

That should not deter you from owning a slow car, only realize its not safe to pass in certain circumstances.

that means exactly what you said! Tailor your driving to the car!

And as you said, I have repeatedly said in this thread, and elsewhere ... the only thing that matters is what makes YOU happy.

great post

 

Well, there I go, opening my mouth and inserting my foot. I should have skimmed the whole thread first.

I've just dealt with arguments like this many times over the years (imports v domestics - V6 v V8 - Auto v Manual), ad nauseum. People feeling the need to question other people's decisions, people feeling the need to justify those decisions. It just gets old, that's all.

One last picking of nits though. I wouldn't consider the MC a slow car as you say. It is all relative.

 

Chows, laugh all you want, and post your nonsensical response like the one above, but the guy was talking about being able to SURVIVE in commute traffic in a Yaris. My reply reflected that you can drive a car that had lower power, less handling, etc. than a Mini or MiNI S and use your human insticts and abilities to GET BY with that car and live.

 

I mean stronger, like forged instead of cast, etc... All car makers do this when they have a higher performance version of a similar engine. The simplest analogy I can give you is to look at old American V8's. High performance versions of a GM 350 or a Ford 351 Cleveland, for example, used 4 bolt mains (instead of 2), forged rods (instead of cast), etc... to handle the extra power being produced. It's the same case with the S vs the non-S. I'll see if I can find the article listing the differences.

Replacement cost is 33% more? Yep, that's definitely a guess.

You mean facetious? Maybe a little. Mechanically a turbo is pretty darn simple. Both cars use variable valve timing (VANOS), but the MC uses variable valve lift (Valvetronic). That's a complicated system much more likely to fail than a simple turbo (or an extra oil line). You did say: "the extra mechanical parts and electronc controls that can break or wear" It's the MC that has the extra mechanicals via the valvetronic system.

 

Dude ... lighten up. That was a joke.

 

After reading this yesterday, I had a chance to put this to the test with my MC manual transmission on the BQE (Brooklyn - Queens Expressway) (Read about it here: http://www.ratetheroads.com/NY/I-278_brooklyn-queens/ - a "nightmare to drive" and "scary").

I had absolutely NO PROBLEM merging into traffic from a short onramp, slower car in front of me, lots of traffic. Just popped on the sport button, into second gear quickly, up to around 4000 RPM, then into 3rd.

It is definitely a personal choice whether you get the MC or MCS - what kind of car you want to drive. I don't buy the 'it's not safe because it doesn't have enough power' argument because that is not my experience at all.

 

I personally agree, but I can see where folks would appreciate that extra burst of power when passing or jetting into a gap in highway traffic. That makes sense to me. In any case, this thread ultimately has to do with the level of engagement and utter amusement to be had when rowing the gears in an MC. I don't think anyone would disagree that is fun!!! No one can deny the strengths/desirability of the MCS, I just think the intent here is to articulate the subtle attraction of motoring in a Cooper and the preference some have for this particular type of driving experience.

 

"Happy Happy JOY JOY" - Ren & Stimpy - Driving Minis since 02

 

Yes I meant facetious haha. So far as your 350 4 bolt main analogy while designed to be stronger they are far from bullet proof as I have personally seen on quite a few occassions and those were installed in street cars not racers so there was no extreme and/or repetitive loads involved. Using your same analogy perhaps you already know the difference in cost between those higher end forged parts vs cast ie a forged steel crankshaft vs a cast one (more than double the $$) so it only makes sense that MINI will also charge more for their higher quality (MCS) engine parts. In case it needs clarifying I was not saying the MCS was more likely to "break" than a MC just that when they do it will be more expensive.

Turbo's may be simple but are far from cheap so that's a $1200+ additional expense that is impossible to incur on a MC. Then there's the higher underhood temps a turbo causes which is harder on electronics, plastics and rubber, head gaskets are under more stress, and all the other parts I previously listed that alone aren't overly expensive but if they fail can take the turbo and other parts out with them creating a huge bill. To summarize, by no means was I suggesting that the turbo and associated parts are complicated, far from it, I agree that they're really quite simple just that they exist on a MCS and not a MC, turbo's add there own set of possible problems to the mix and when things go wrong it's not going to be cheap. Having said that the car is under warranty for 4 yrs and unless Mini can prove abuse you have nothing to worry about (until the warranty expires).

Anyway, I'm not interested in an internet battle I just wanted to clarify why I typed what I did. In my OP I said while I'm sure the MCS is fun, for me the MC is adequate and with the money saved I could and will create an excellent "corner carver" which to me is more practical and fun. I should also add that I'm not some kid that's read a few articles in a tuner magazine and now figure I'm a mechanical whiz. My opinion is based on my personal experience as a licenced automotive repair mechanic (I also hold a licence as a commercial transport mechanic) but by no means do I think I know it all and like they say "opinions are like belly buttons - everyone has one" so to each there own.

 

Just f-in drive!

I was at a track event last weekend, and it doesn't matter which car you have. Just drive.

 

I know you weren't trying to be ugly, but this is a pretty durnt ugly post. To make the assumption that your driving experiences are so much worse than anyone else's is a pretty big assumption . Anyhow, I spent my entire life up until the last year driving in the #1 city in the country for road rage, horrible traffic and terrible drivers (driving a 4 cyl auto most of those years, no less), and somehow managed to survive - never even had an accident. You probably would have never guessed that by assuming that I've never driven in a "actual city" because I haven't had problems merging in my MC...I guess all the people in Europe and the rest of the world driving happily in their MC's must not live in real cities with real traffic either...<shrugs>

Anyhow, I'm done with this thread. It's just a shame that someone can't say something good about the MC on this forum without hordes of people trying with all their might to completely discount someone's good impression.

 

i loved my old cooper!