Welp, I have nearly 6,000 miles on Romi, and took her in recently to have her brain upgraded. They gave a nice MCS for a loaner.

I am still convinced I made the right choice. I prefer the MC over the MCS. I could get a ticket in either one of them.

 

Honestly the average person would realize more potential savings by cutting starbucks out of their lives than trying to save gas on two nearly identical cars. Like I said before, if you can't afford an extra $20 a month strain on your wallet, you probably need to rethink buying a car for $20k+ .

 

Actually, it doesn't. The MCS has a stiffer chasis (thicker sway bars, sportier suspension, etc) than the standard Cooper. Depending on your ability to drive a FWD car fast, and set it up properly, more potential in corners on both entrance and exit. They're close, but given equal driver skill, the S would jog away in every corner.

I know what you're getting at, but power matters a lot. I was pulling away from 997 turbo's in the corners at the track (Does a 997 handle that bad? No... the drivers just didn't have a clue what they were doing). In the straights they would pass me doing triple digits while I was still accelerating out of the corner.

No doubt, a standard cooper handles a lot better than you're average toyota corolla econo-box, and by the same logic, is a lot more fun to drive, but there's no comparision between the Cooper and the S in terms of capability on a track.

 

I used to have an auto MC and have now moved to manual MCS. In all honestly, I loved my MC and if it was a manual car, I probably wouldn't have changed cars. There are times now though that I do love the extra torque.

It would be nice if you put up your configuration. If you're thinking of getting things like leather and chrome, I would definitely give those things up for the S. Like others have suggested, go to the dealer and check out the options.

As for it only being 1650 more because of the "added" value, I don't necessarily agree. I prefer the look of the MC, the no-scoop hood, no spoiler, 15" wheels... so those things weren't worth much to me, but if you are thinking of adding those things, definitely consider that the MCS comes with some of them.

 

I'm the original poster and not worried about speeding tix because of the Valentine One I use for anything more than a trip around the block. One of the reasons I am thinking about the MCS over the MC is for the more powerful engine even though I don't drive a lot of miles or go to the track. My thinking is that with such a small car, if you are in an accident with a bigger car, SUV or truck, you have more of a chance of getting injured, even with a car rated as high as the MC or MCS for safety protection. But, the MCS, with the bigger, torquier engine might give you a better chance to avoid an accident than the MCS. Any thoughts on this?

 

I think any advantage...given all the variables...would be purely theoretical. The power could get you into trouble as easily as out of it.

 

First, I would warn anyone that thinks their radar/laser detector is going to save them from speeding tickets. I no longer own a detector as it lulled me into a false sense of security and actually resulted in a higher ration of tickets for the two years I used one. Police are adept at using their equipment to catch you. They'll shut off their gun until you're right next to them and then... zappo, you're busted. While the detector might save you from some tickets, that sense of security resulting in driving a "little" faster will counteract that affect.

About the engine in the MCS protecting you in a crash... nuh-uh. For one thing, and someone correct me if I'm wrong, the engine displacement in the MCS and MC are the same. The additional horses from the MCS comes from the supercharger/turbocharger, not a larger engine. So... okay, there is some extra stuff under the bonnet of the MCS but that's just more stuff to get pushed back into the cockpit in a collision. I would not consider it a barrier at all. The IIHS doesn't even test the "S" separately from the base Cooper as there is no discernable difference in safety equipment or vehicle engineering.

 

I was actually just about to respond to your post saying I agree 100%.

I guess if someone doesn't care so much about speed or is just extremely content with the Cooper I can understand. But if you consider a 5 year finance, the MCS is $58.73 per month more expensive than the Cooper, not considering the extra options. Adding them in it's only $30.94 more. That plus roughly 15 bucks a month more in gas...

I just can't see giving up 54hp and 63 lbs/ft of torque (78 with overboost!), all at a significantly lower RPM, for such relatively small savings. Not to mention in a better handling (even if just by a small margin) and arguably more aesthetically pleasing vehicle. I'd assert that if your on a budget the MCS actually gives much more bang for your buck!

Now I'm not bashing the Cooper in any way, so I apologize if this comes off as such. It's a very capable vehicle that trounces most of its competition and looks damn good doing it. But unless one is on the tightest of budgets, I just don't see the merit in passing up that sweet turbo.

However these are my prioritiest in a vehicle and I totally understand that some people's are totally different. To each their own - whatever will make you happy with your purchase. After all it's your 20K+ and you should spend it as you please. At the end of the day you're getting a MINI! Therefore you can't do too wrong in my eyes.

 

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure msmingel is referring to active safety benefits of the MCS over MC, not passive. I've actually heard BMW make that claim many times about their own line of vehicles. Having the acceleration to get oneself out of potentially dangerous situations can be beneficial to accident avoidance. That said, I'd argue against statements like that. I can only see added power helping the most skilled of drivers, and even then to a very small extent.

So from a safety point of view I'm pretty sure the MCS wouldn't have any leg up over the MC. It's more from a strict performance point of view, and perhaps aesthetics if you want to be subjective.

 

Yeah, after reading her post again, you're right... she's talking about accident avoidance. I own both and I think I'd be more likely to get INTO an accident with the MCS than the MC because... well... hey, I like to use that supercharger and crank up those horses. I mean.... what's the point of having them if you don't use them ? It'd be like kissing your sister !

 

I could have easily afforded an MCS. My budget when I went looking for a new car was $36K. I ended up only spending $23K on Romi.

Cost had nothing to do with it. Fuel efficiency had nothing to do with it.

The factors that influenced me were fun and long term reliability. I plan on keeping this car 10 years. I do not want to start a turbo versus non-turbo discussion. Based on my own experience, a turbo charged engine simply does not have the life expectancy of a comparable non-turbo charged engine.

A lot of people will argue that, but let's talk at the 200,000 mile mark and compare notes. No sense in speculating about it. For me, I will never own another turbo charged engine based on my experience with the two cars that did have them (Volvo and Nissan).

The better gas mileage and lower insurance rates were just neato things I got as a result of my decision.

 

My wife has an 04 Mazda3 and has commented that she'd maybe like a Mini too. Given that the MC probably will outperform her current car I bet she'd prefer a well equipped MC over a more staid MCS. She'd prefer spiffier trim options/stripes and looks over torque. Customizing the car is one thing that makes Minis different from Mazdas. I think there were 3 options available on her car after she picked the color: sunroof/cd changer, ABS/side airbags, AT.

 

Yea I totally agree with you! Now if the if MCS dramatically out handled the MC then I can see it being a safer vehicle overall. But I personally don't see the power advantage making it any safer. Those extra horses just beg you to make use of them! Even when you probably shouldn't be...

See a case like this makes perfect sense to me. If financial gains (or losses) completely aside, one still prefers the MC over the MCS then I say go for it. Although I definitely would argue comparing the reliability of a turbocharged Nissan or Volvo to a MINI, but that'd be for an entirely different thread.

 

Not sure where you got that information. The Mazda 3 will do 0-60 in 8 seconds (I assume she has an automatic). The Manual MINI will do it in 8.5 (Auto is probably closer to 9). The Mazda 3 is also a full second faster than the MINI in 1/4 mile).

Mazda 3 weighs 2857 lbs and has 160 HP ~17 lbs per HP
MINI weighs 2510 lbs and has 118 HP ~21 lbs per HP

Torque is almost the same ratio.

If you look above, "Trim Options" cost the same on both models, the savings aren't that much if you factor in the fact that the S comes with more standard.

 

Just for clarification. I did not question the "reliability" at all. I spoke of long term engine life expectancy. Just wanted to clear that up.

 

An interesting thread to read through. Once factor not mentioned is resell value and desirability. the extra resale value of an MCS may more than offset its premium over the Cooper.
As far as active safety, the acceleration of an MCS can get you out of tight traffic situations rapidly. The extra horsepower at low rpm also means for very relaxed freeway cruising and driving.
The fuel economy difference is inconsequential.
Besides, this is america and horsepower rules.

 

Well, that is certainly an opinion.

 

Now, if the Cooper D were available, I would buy it instead of the S just because I like diesels, and they last forever with tremendous fuel savings.

 

So, if you are driving along on a highway at 65 or 70 and the 18 wheeler to your right decides to start moving into your lane since he doesn't see you, wouldn't a MCS have more pick up and power to get you out of the way than a MC?

 

I definately agree the MC engine would outlast the hotrodded MCS!!

 

Like other's have said, I doubt anyone other than a professionally trained driver or someone very experienced would be able to make much use out of the additional power and avoid an accident that they couldn't have avoided with the regular cooper.

If you want to learn a bit about safety, and why bigger isn't necessarily better, read this.

 

+1 msmingel the near instant acceleration of the MCS helps avoid difficult situations.
+1 goosefraba...if you are getting the vehicle for economy reasons a Cooper D would be excellent.
So, both are right. Is a personal preference.

 

I don't have much to add to this often appearing thread... other than to say that I own both a (loaded) Cooper and an (stripped) MCS, and actually prefer driving the Cooper.

 

Most of us don't care about that. Not many people buy a car and keep it for 9 years now adays...

If my engine lasts until 150k miles i'll be extremely surprised, but I couldn't care less.

 

Don't drive next to an 18 wheeler? It would completely depend on the situation. Of course an MCS would be able to get out of the way faster, but how fast do cars and trucks change lanes? Whether it takes 5 seconds or 6.8 seconds to get out of the way, is that going to matter? Defensive driving is what will keep you out of trouble, not a faster car. There are lots of reasons to upgrade to an MCS, I don't think accident avoidance is one of them.

When i'm driving on the freeway (Or anywhere for that matter) I'm constantly scanning my surroundings to know where cars are in relation to me. Often times I know without even checking my mirrors that there's a car to my right or left, based on how fast i'm going compared to them, and the fact that I made a mental note of the car's location when I passed them.