This sounds like the CVT that is being talked about. 60,000 miles while possible in ~13 months (the first Aisin-Warner a/t-equipped MCSa cars started to hit the U.S. around January, 2005), it is doubtful for even a courier company to hit 60,000 in that short of timeframe.

 

I thought that DSG was the equivalent of SMG (up to just before the point of patent infringement)? Am I missing something?

 

Completely agree with you - I actually like to drive the MCSa more than my highly modded C5. It is kind of like a street-legal gokart!

If your "thing" is 0-60 mph, the MCSa is not for you. (Of course, neither is the MT MCS, for that matter.) The real fun of the car is running it through the gears and not having to ride the clutch in stop-and-go traffic. I would also submit that the MCSa handles every bit as well as a MT MCS (and can be modded in the handling department every bit as much as a MT MCS).

If you are experiencing downshift harshness, you might check into whether all of the factory service campaigns have been perfomred on the car. My MCSa was experiencing part throttle downshift harshness (such as when you are coasting to a red traffic light). After having the DME re-program service campaign performed, the harshness is pretty much gone (and when it does happen, it is much less harsh than before the service campaign).

Out of curiousity, you mention jerky shifts of the SMG (presumably SMGII?) in auto mode; do you recall which Drivelogic setting you were in? Higher (4/5) settings will be more "jerky" because shifting is optimized to keep engine revs up (especially noticed during down-*****). In the lower (1/2/3) settings, I haven't noticed jerky shifts.

 

As far as I know the DSG is akin to the SMG and other "F1" type systems, which have a hydrolic clutch doing the work for the driver. Many of these systems can change or skip gears faster than any person can which is why they are used in Formula1. They can be very fun to drive and revmatch splendidly

I agree, and IMHO the handling is really the key to the Mini's performance. Though it is true that some people can get faster times with a manual transmission vs many automatics on equal cars, driving the car as they do to achieve those times is hard on the tranny and will wear it prematurely if done frequently (or as I've seen on boards, hit the dreaded money shift in their efforts). Besides, people do not drive like that all of the time in normal traffic, and often I even experience MT drivers shifting/being rather slower then the autos. I've got nothing against manuals for sure, it can be fun to play around with and control no doubt, but the whole "faster" numbers thing when it comes to a fractions of a second, or even a whole second or more, on paper is not really applicable to the real world daily driving experience just as the numbers of the F1 trannys to the MT aren't really key until you get to high performance conditions.

Good to know, but not an issue to me as I do not drive in auto much and when I do it is fine to me - I was just mentioning it as I have seen it remarked on here at least once so it might be something he'd want to know about if he is expecting the world's smoothest auto (and smooth/disconnected is just not what the car is about ).

Yes, it was SMGII in the E46 M3. It was mostly driven in S5 but the auto mode was tried in a few settings and it was always harsh. Thing is, that was when the SMG was overall the best and fastest, the time they "upgraded" it it suffered and overall felt worse in different ways and people we know have had a similar experience (oh BMW and their software issues on everything - autos/MTs/SMGs ). Dunno if it has improved over the years but then again, if you never had the better earlier programming you wouldn't miss it. Thank god it had SMG though, or they would have blamed the engine failure on a MT overrev. But that's another story told already ...

 

thats one thing i didnt enjoy is stop and go traffic and im in alot of it. i would rather be able to just relax and eat a hamburger than having to keep shifting gears for 3 hours to get a half a mile down the road haha. anyway you guys have been very helpful. now i just need to decide what all i want to do to the car. these cars are super cool

 

I searched the forums a few times and haven't found the info I'm looking for. I'd like to revive this thread (I know I know...) and ask about the limits of the steptronic in terms of modifications to the car. I'm curious for my own ideas with my car, but I am sure there are other people that might have similar questions.

* What modifications are NOT possible? (i.e. don't fit, not compatible, transmission cannot handle -if that's an issue)
* What modifications ARE possible? (i.e. exhaust)
* What modifications ARE possible, but require some different parts? (i.e. Alta Intake can't use the colored silicone tubes)

Thanks for the help

 

I take it since you mentioned the Alta Intake that you are talking about the MCSa tranny. I have installed most of the common mods on my MCSa and have since removed due to issues. All not related to tranny.

Pretty much all mods are the same and don't require much modification.

Superchager reduction pulley - Is a bit harder to install due to the engine being shifted over to accomidate the larger tranny.
Crank pulley - Same as supercharger pulley.
CAI - Alta has a new hose almost ready for the MCSa. I should have a prototype soon. But without the hose nothing different.
Exhaust/Header - Nothing special.
ECU - No company has come out with one specific to the tranny that I know of.
Head/Cam - Nothing special.
Intercooler - Nothing special.

Anyone else?

 

I figured most stuff was fine...but I'm still a noob, I figured best to ask for some advice first.

Thanks!

 

Anytime

 

I can truly understand the need for an automatic tranny in some cities... I personally feel you lose some of the driving experience with an auto, but certainly understand the need for one. My other car is an auto and used mainly for city errands.
Automatics usually can not handle much more power than for their original application. It is easier to beef up a manual tranny than an automatic.

 

So, has anyone contacted AISEN for info or looked into how the same tranny has been used in other cars? It may already have been proven to work with more hp in other vehicles - some autos are very robust (ie consider how Mercedes uses them in AMG applications) so it might surprise you if you get info from the manufacturer .

 

I've been looking at Mini's for two years and for the past year with some serious interest. I kept bouncing back and forth between the two (M vs Auto), but decided that I would just get an MSCa to play with for the next few years (tangent: looking to relocate to Japan in 3 years for a one/two year stint teaching)...so I figured for now I would just try to keep the price and the mods (avoiding JCW was so hard) to just enjoy the car and see what the future held.

Now I can't contain myself!

The urge to mod the car is tough to beat and the thought of garaging it for a year or two is sounding reasonable. So here I am...

As for the automatic not being able to handle as much power...that's where I get curious about the Steptronic and the power it might be able to handle. For example: SPI Twin Charger...out of the question, or reasonable?

...I was planning on spending some time this weekend doing some Steptronic research to see what I could find out.

 

Ah...you beat me to it (just as I was typing)...that's my thought exactly. With the comments -taken with a grain of salt- on the positive reaction to the MCSa with JCW in the UK I would think that it could handle a nice amount of power.

 

Some of the issues of the transmission are not just related to the hardware but to the software. When I had a lightened crank pulley installed on my car it caused the car to not shift as it should. Meaning the car would rev so fast that the ecu couldn't properly calculate the shift points. Shifts in 1,2,3,4 would occur @ a increased redline of 7200rpm.

 

The autos used by AMG , vettes , etc are built to handle the torque for that specific application. The mini's space constraints make it difficult to modify and fit beefed up parts... Not saying it can't be done.... but more difficult for sure..

 

someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe that this transmission has been used in the 225hp audi TT.

in any case, for street applications, you have to question whether you would want much more power than this in a FWD car with no LSD.

 

i was thinking the same thing, but i have an 05 MCSa and i love it! i have raced manual MCS and have never been embarassed by the manual. i think people are afraid do drive the auto, as i was, but for me im always in stop and go traffic. but i just love it! the paddles are alot of fun too! but yeah, i beet manuals just was well as autos...so i see no problem. take one for a test drive and check it out for your self. dont get me wrong i love manuals, but after have all my cars manual, i decided i would go for the auto.

 

I just sent an inquiry to Aisin asking them of the TF-61SN transmission load capability. I'll post the reply when (if) I get it.

 

Awesome...that would be some good stats to have. Than again, I donno if I want to see my bill of the parts I'll order if the numbers come back more positive than I think

I talked with Tuls and Chad @ Detroit Tuned a little bit about the limits...I'm just trying to decide if I want to blow the car up just yet...I mean I just crossed over 2,000 miles

 

The autos used by AMG, vettes, etc. are inline configuration and do not have to work with the MINI's transaxle. The transaxle is the weak point. An inline A/T can be setup to handle north of 700 ft/lbs.

 

Just don't do what I did in my first MINI! Blow it up twice! Hmm, I would stay away from internal engine mods on a CVT. Don't use Steptronic all the time, as it tends to wear out quicker. Also be sure to check trans fluid if possible every 10k miles if you tend to have a lead foot like me. Basically thats all I can suggest. Goodluck!


P.S. Don't let my words worry you.

 

In the MINI's case as well as most other front drive cars, is it considered a transaxle when the engine and transmission are oriented transversely? What about Porsche and their true transaxles - no problems there handling gobs of torque.

 

Yes.

Porsche has a true "transaxle". The transverse transaxle is more of a packaging exercise (to enable the engine and transmission to fit in a front-wheel drive configuration) and as a consequence, is torque-challenged.