[zstkng]

New 911 Turbo with variable valve Turbo Charger.
Why doesnt MINI develop something like this?

http://www.autoblog.com/2005/11/27/n...bine-geometry/

[wibbly]

Yeah but a MINI with a turbo charger

Just not a 'proper' MINI is it

[zstkng]

but i reckon in a year or two people on these boards will be saying "why didnt MINI go turbo in the first place"

[Paul]

I don't know, the supercharger has such character, even if the turbo is a winner, the current S will always have a place in many MINI affectionados heart.

[JG.26]

Quote: Originally Posted by Paul Mullett (original)

I don't know, the supercharger has such character, even if the turbo is a winner, the current S will always have a place in many MINI affectionados heart.

Would agree Paul, just hope the new S doesn't lose too much of it, I'm sure it will drive and perform brill but will it have as much character which was a nice bonus in the current model

[MINImeat]

Quote: Originally Posted by Penguinblue (original)

Would agree Paul, just hope the new S doesn't lose too much of it, I'm sure it will drive and perform brill but will it have as much character which was a nice bonus in the current model

Yes, be very careful with the "character" of the MINI.
It's why we love 'em so.

[St00ge]

power isn't everything.

I'd like to drive the 07 MINI a bit, but i'd never sell my MCS for it. I bought it mostly cos of the supercharger

[Shaun]

Dont forget the supercharger has a place in the Mini history books too.
The classic Cyberman shoulder pad Shorrock supercharger heres an example.
http://mk1-performance-conversions.c...rrock_trav.htm



To me its the name SUPER CHARGER Grrrrr!!!! Turbo sounds to close to Turd and is stuck on the back window of lots of unsavoury cars in big vinyl letters.

[JNS513]

Personnaly, I'm a bit worried by the "more than possible" Turbo lag. Then, it's a fact that the supercharger sounds so lovely and takes a big part in the Mini Cooper S character. I love it.

Well we will see in few months. I'm sure the car will be brilliant.

[Paul]

If anything, the new engine feels sharper and quicker to respond than the current model. The was no sign of turbo lag in the cars I drove, certainly nothing dramatic. I often find the current model can feel a little bogged down, so I'm confident the new one will feel better all round in most conditions. (But it doesn't sound as good).

[MINImeat]

I know you're talking about the motor/intake sound in the car, but you did say the exhaust note was louder or more "pronounced" in your track day report, didn't you Paul?

[Paul]

Yep, the exhaust sounded lovely.

[rubyredmz3]

A theory, for what it is worth. . .

Mini owners cherish how their call is small, and the supercharger exagerates that feeling of "smallness". It makes the engine feel bigger than it is, not boosted, and thus makes the car just feel smaller. The instant throttle response of the supercharger is integral to the character of it, and given that the MINI isn't actually all that light (at least compared to the original), the supercharger is essential to keeping that smallness. Even the slightest lag will reveal that it is a boosted motor, and that "boosted" feeling is a feeling of an assisted motor helping an overly large vehicle go fast. Sure the whine gives its "boostedness" away, but the power feel is of a small car with excellent power to weight, despite it not actually being much "smaller" weight-wise than other cars like it.

[Paul]

The S certainly has it's fair share of "lag"as it is. Sometimes it can feel really quite bogged down in the low rev range. The new S felt better in this regard, for the short time I had to drive it. You'd think it wouldn't by the nature of super v turbo charging, but it did.

[Root Ginger]

Yes the S certainly suffers lag. Try doing 0 - 30 next to a Cooper in an S. The Cooper is far quicker until the boost rises on the supercharger of the S. The Cooper has that nice nippy feeling about town in comparison.

The reason the new turbo has little or no lag is due to it being essentially two turbos in one unit. A nice easy to spin small bladed area that requires little exhaust gas to spin producing a little boost low down in the rev range, once that is spinning and the revs rise the second much larger bladed area is allowed to spin producing big boost and big power. The larger blades are only allowed to spin when the revs are sufficient that it is past it's lag zone. This creates a turbo engine that can produce high power with no lag.

Then the advantage of the turbo is that the power produced is exponential, a supercharger is linear to engine revs. The fact that it is driven by exhaust gases and not by the engine means that there is no parasitic drag associated with them. It's this that creates supercharger lag. This is also the reason the S revs higher on startup than a Cooper. If it started like a Cooper the supercharger would stall then engine. That's how much power it takes to spin it up.

[mcarlo52]

Thanks, that was an excellent explanation.

[rubyredmz3]

um, not sure if I agree with you about any of that "lag" talk about the cooper S. . .

The car does have an inordinately heavy flywheel, which can hurt throttle response slightly, but a cooper S is not slower than a cooper to 30, and a turbo will never give you better response down low. Also, there is parasitic drag from a supercharger, yes, but its not enough to stall the engine, its there to produce more power and it does produce mroe power at almost every rpm in the rev band.

A brief google search reveals a cooper S at 2.9s (from SCC), a works cooper s at 3.0s(also from SCC), and a base cooper at 3.4s (from Consumer reports).

My wife's JCW cooper S is developing 90% of peak torque by 2500 rpm! Lag, I think not. . .

http://www.carolinaautomasters.com/d...aryJohnson.JPG

[hayesl]

90% of peak torque at 2500rpm is good, but the new S reaches 100% of peak torque at just 1600rpm, which to my mind sounds extraordinarily flexible. I'm gonna have to drive a current S before they're all gone just so I can compare to the new one when it comes out.

[Paul]

I can only speak from my experience driving both cars, and the new engine felt much better from low down and, in general, had much more flexible and usable power in general.

I've no reason to make this up, we have two S in our family and I love them both, but the new engine (from my all too brief experience) is a winner in terms of power delivery.

[Root Ginger]

Quote: Originally Posted by rubyredmz3 (original)

um, not sure if I agree with you about any of that "lag" talk about the cooper S. . .

The car does have an inordinately heavy flywheel, which can hurt throttle response slightly, but a cooper S is not slower than a cooper to 30, and a turbo will never give you better response down low. Also, there is parasitic drag from a supercharger, yes, but its not enough to stall the engine, its there to produce more power and it does produce mroe power at almost every rpm in the rev band.

A brief google search reveals a cooper S at 2.9s (from SCC), a works cooper s at 3.0s(also from SCC), and a base cooper at 3.4s (from Consumer reports).

My wife's JCW cooper S is developing 90% of peak torque by 2500 rpm! Lag, I think not. . .

http://www.carolinaautomasters.com/d...aryJohnson.JPG

OK fair point about the 0 - 30 figures but the point I was trying to get at was that the Cooper is far nippier at low speed being NA than the S is. I have a Cooper and an S and the when switching between the two the Cooper feels much quicker until the revs start to rise and that's when the lack of SC can be felt.

If the S starter did not spin the engine up faster than the Cooper the S would not start because of the drag imposed by the SC. Once it is running it is not an issue.