I got curious. I picked up the UK Technical data sheet over at motoringfile.com

http://motoringfile.com/2006/09/07/o...pdf-uk-market/

I checked (and double-checked) the math, and the fuel consumption figures there in MPG do use imperial gallons. Here's those figures in US gallons (two significant figures)

MC
Urban: 30 / Extra Urban: 51 / Combined: 40

MCS
Urban: 26 / Extra Urban: 41 / Combined: 34

Overall, the MC clocks in with least 15% better mileage than the MCS. Gear ratios are going to be partly to blame here -- the MCS has higher gear ratios in the transmission and a much lower final drive ratio. We've been getting excited about those figures, of course, sometimes because we've seen the imperial gallons figure which is higher. Hopefully this will help to dispel any of that confusion.

But...

UK fuel consumption measurements for the current MCS are (converted to US gallons) 19.9 urban, 34.5 extra urban, 32.8 combined. That works out to an improvement of 30% on the urban score, 19% extra urban, and only 4% on the combined measurement.

EPA estimates for the current MCS are 25 city / 32 highway.

So I expect we might see EPA estimates of 30 city / 35 highway for the MCS, tops (current is 25 / 32). Maybe 34 city / 39 highway on the MC (current is 28/36). That'd be a 20% improvement on the city side, about 10% on the highway side.

Just a SWAG.

-W-

 

I did this same calculation a while back and your projections agree with mine. I hope we're right! I guess we'll know when the US specs are released.

 

Thanks for doing this because, frankly, I'm not much of a numbers guy and never would have tackled this myself, especially on a speculative level. Encouraging observation....I'm stoked!!

 

If only we had the diesel version available here in the US. That would push the highway number in real useage over 50 and probably around 60mpg. That would get my attention and probably some of my money.

 

How about comparing those figures to real world data? I could be wrong, but I remember seeing people saying they get approx 22mpg or 23 with their current gen MCS. So does that roughly translate to around 27mpg real world for the cooper S?

 

Gut feeling on these numbers -- I'd say that's a bit optimistic, and my money is on real-world 25-26 but I'm a pessimist by nature. I'm betting on 10-15% improvement overall for most people. Some won't see any, some will see bigger improvements.

Also never trust the OBC. Always check that thing by hand. My Toyota always tells me I'm getting 3-5 MPG better than I'm actually getting.

-W-

 

When do the new EPA milage procedures take effect? They are revising them to be more accurate to how people actually drive, right? That may mess your SWAGing up.

Looks like it won't be until 2008 model year:
http://www.caranddriver.com/article....ticle_id=10557

 

If you drive like grandma- 60+ mpg...lol

 

If that happened for 2007, we might see the numbers actually go down.

C&D also says in their MINI preview article: "fuel consumption is better by as much as 12.5 percent". I was betting on 15% in the EPA numbers. They won't have aroad test until next year.

Projected fuel economy (C/D est):
EPA city driving: 23–28 mpg
EPA highway driving: 32–36 mpg

That's on par with my estimates, give or take.

-W-

 

Why not interpolate those new figures to translate to very roughly 30% improvement City and 19% Highway?

Am I missing something? BMW and PSA didn't design this mill from the ground up just to have it be a 5-10% improvement in fuel economy. They're throwing down the gauntlet. This hot hatch will revolutionize this country.

 

If an R56 Cooper got me around 38-40mpg on the highway and mid-30s around town I'd be thrilled!! My present Cooper isn't far from that now.