I race.
I know how to launch.
I don't get my wingtips stuck on the pedals.


Per (unrespected? )

 

You get respect from me for bettering the manufacturer's stated time by such a huge margin...my 04 RSX-S is supposed to be capable of a 6.1 second 0-60 time, but I defy anyone to actually reproduce that....

And for the record, the R56 I drove on my test drive felt as fast or faster than my 200hp RSX, even with two people on board.

 

Dude.. I totally believe you. The wrongful assumption here is that most people think automotive journalists are all good drivers. In the case of GRM that may be true, but in the case of the C+Ds and R+Ts of the world they by and large probably aren't the BEST drivers around.

Also most people saying it can't be 5.7s are probably R53 owners that are nervous their car doesn't perform as well.

 

I've always thought that a better measure of a car's acceleration is the 5-60 (rolling start) test. Yeah, your time will be 1-2 seconds slower, but it's a great equalizer, since some cars (especially those with narrow power bands)are difficult to launch. 0-60 times can be very deceptive...both the R56 and a Mazda RX-8 probably return similar times, but the MINI is by far the faster car in the real world, and a rolling-start acceleration test would show this.

It's a more useful figure to use anyway, since most of us probably don't perform drop-clutch tire-shredding launches that much. I couldn't even if I wanted to; I live in Seattle.

 

I'll go one better than that. The R56 will not run in G Stock. I predict it will get bumped.

Per, what timing/speed equipment do you use? I know we don't grill the automotive mags every time they post a number, but since you're a member of the community here, would you mind telling us what your setup is?

Not that you need me to say it, but there is no doubt in my mind these are real numbers. You've got no motivation to misstate the times.

 

NO Karl!!! Don't say that! I'm a track day guy and this will be my first car that ventures into autocross arena. I want any advantage I can get!

 

Maybe it will go to DS, but that will mean the R53 will follow shortly. SCCA wouldn't want the MINI winning 3 classes.

I use either a Vericom VC2000 performance computer or a Escort GTimer, depending on how much testing I have to do. Vericom is clunky, but has a lot more options (5-60, 6-61, whatever)

 

I would imagine that the timing equipment used by BMW, R&T, C&D et al would be somewhat more accurate than a Vericom VC2000 or a Escort GTimer. That's probably were the reported timeing difference comes from.

 

This was exactly what went through my mind while reading through this thread. Well, maybe not the wingtip comment, but that makes the point perfectly clear. Being a long time subscriber to GRM, I know these guys know what they're doing.

I'm looking forward to watching the progress on the GRM Mini.

Thanks,
John

 

Actually, the Vericom *is* what a lot of the other magazines use. It was about $3000 about 10 years ago and still works great. The G-Timer is good, maybe a little optimistic by a tenth or two.

Now, surface (asphalt/concrete/whatever) and temperature can play a huge role. On crappier asphalt, the average is 6.3 seconds.

 

ooooh.....I hope the r56 has that sort of speed, but it def. does not have the looks , sorry.

 

Thankfully, looks are a matter of OPINION.

Performance however, is undeniable.

 

no doubt.

 

so, who has a real world 1/4mi time for the r56 to back up a 5.4s 0-60?

you do realize that a 5.4s 0-60 puts you in the same category as a 350z which is ~12lb/hp, while the r56 is ~15lb/hp.

gotta say i think someone's stopwatch is broken. 195 lbf of torque doesn't explain it, either.

 

Nice work Per. Both the driving and on the wingtips comment.

I believe. Even if it means I have to think about selling my '06!

 

Well, if you weren't planning on using R-compound tires, you could run in STX if the R56 gets bumped out of GS. The PAX for STX is almost the same as GS (.808 versus .803).

Depending on how competitive your area is, you're probably going to get owned running street tires in GS, so you could move to STX and take advantage of all the suspension goodies with almost no PAX penalty.

 

This isn't totally true...Coming from a WRX, the best way on those cars to get a fast launch was through an extremely fast slip of the clutch...Outright dumping it often bogs the motor. On DSMs however (the old eclipse gsx, galants, talon, and laser) you could bounce it off the rev limiter and drop the clutch and get huuuuuuge launches that way. The part at risk on those cars was a weak center differential.

 

interesting...

 

um I saw some early posts in this thread say things like "not bad for stock"
somehow I cant see a new R56 as putting down 209hp which I assume is the one that did the 5.7 to 60 yes?

my stock R56 thats two weeks old is no where near that fast and im use to driving 700hp cars, but I can tell this thing is maybe low 7's to 60, even with a hard launch and powershifting through the gears.(possibly with better tires you could get in the 6's).

somehow I dont think your gonna do 5's with the stock 170hp.

so maybe im missing something here but I dont recall a stock R56 with 200+ hp.

nice numbers, but those numbers are not a reflection of a stock 07 R56.
if so, then my turbo on mine must be broken.

 

Well... you might want to read the (whole) thread from the beginning, and check the link provide to Grass Roots Motorsports.
They dyno'd the car and have all the info availible... and they're definately NOT claiming 209 bhp.
The person who is claiming the numbers on the STOCK car has posted here (GRMPer)... maybe you could ask him to clarify some more?

 

Having owned an STi - the few times I've romped on the throttle of my new R56 - i've noted the turbo is supiciously very similar to the twin scroll STi turbo in behavior. At WOT it's nutty how all the power gets all delivered. Take out the losses for drivetrain loss and AWD, and the MINI MCS begins to feel a lot like the drivetrain of the STi (at least what my 41 yo memory can remember from three years ago in the STi).

 

Yep, box stock MCS...I think the trick, if you want to call it that, is that the asphalt that I tested on that day was exceptionally sticky/grippy. I've retested on crappier asphalt, with different fuel loads and just about every run is still under 6.3 seconds.

 

A LOT of this has to do with the driver; I remember when Brian Garfield was cranking out low 6 second 0-60 times with an '02 R53. Before the gearing change, before the bump in HP.....it helped that he was the '02 H Stock Pro Solo National Champion......

 

Im actually a very decent driver. And my point, although I may have missed something in the article, is no matter how good you are, I have serious doubts that you can take my current 07 S and do a 5 second 0-60 run.

it doesnt take a rocket scientist to launch the car and power through the gears. Car is easy as hell to drive(ie easy to shift) and ive been drag racing cars for a long time. (see my other car in the sig picture).

my guess is, this 5 second run was not done in a 170hp 07 car like mine it was done with the car that was putting down a bit more power.

so my guess is there is some misunderstanding here, and I did read the whole article and its very unclear as to what car with what HP was used for the test.

so I see this
then I see the 0-60 numbers next to this
so the 5.7 backsup the fact that the car is putting down 209 HP which is about 40 more then stock.

so are we to believe that a different "Stock" 07 S mini dynoed at almost 40 HP more?

I would venture to suggest that 40HP more would be enough to decently drop the 0-60 time and as such as nothing to do with the driver as much as it has to do with the driver+increase in HP.

so question remains the same what car ran the 0-60 in 5.7, a stock 07 S mini? which I doubt, or some modified 07 S mini that put down 40HP more then stock?

 

The fast 0-60 5.7 second run(s) were done in a Stock R56 MCS by GRMPer.

If it is reproducible in that MCS then it exists. Doesn't even matter what the true dyno numbers are (but that would interesting to check with different dynos).

Your results may vary (alot) as we have seen many many times with the R53. HP and torque vary alot. Some R53s were great in stock form about the same in HP as some modded R53s using the same dyno under the same conditions.

When we order a R56 sight unseen we don't really know if we will get a turtle or rabbit version. If you do buy one off the lot and can test drive it then you could make a fair estimate. I drove a stock R56 with no LSD and stock suspension with 16" wheels and it was definitely faster than my Modded 2003 MCS. Didn't corner as well but it was plenty fast.

Maybe some electronic timing by an independent source would be fun to do with several R56 MCS. Make the wheels and tires all the same then compare the 16" and 17" wheels. Maybe have one with LSD. Same one driver to test them all.