[OldRick]

I've read a lot of opinions about what should be the sequence in which one upgrades one's Mini, and I want to offer a completely different point of view.

The usual recommended sequence of cold-air intake, exhaust replacement, and pulley change affects only one aspect of performance, and has a couple of significant liabilities, such as destroying any vestige of a warrantee, and adding a lot of noise.

My suggested mod sequence is based around my favorite activity with my ELO MCS; blasting around hill-country twisties and hairpins. I find that an hour of lateral acceleration serves very well to clear out the mental cobwebs and brings a more real perspective to the mental activities I do most of the time.

My personal priorities are:
- Add to every aspect of the car's country-road performance, not just straight-line acceleration,
- Minimize the chances of being pulled over by the cops, by not making obvious changes that scream "modified",
- Do so without adding much noise to the car - I like music, and supercharger whine or exhaust blat isn't. When I want additional noise from a car, I'll buy a hearing aid and turn it up.

So here is my suggested mod sequence:

- The first priority is to upgrade the miserably heavy and thumpy factory wheels and tires. Reducing rotating and unsprung weight is the single most effective change you can make to any car, and the 45-50lb. stock Mini wheels are unacceptable, even if they didn't carry hard-sidewalled runflat tires.
The cost-effectiveness of replacing the Mini wheels and tires is far greater than any other single change, and the only Good reason (aside from the pimp-my-ride aspect) to use larger wheels than necessary is to accomodate huge brakes, as is required to be competitive in racing - all else is mere imitation and racer-chaser wanna-be'ism. So, were you planning to drop $3000-4000 on upgraded brakes? If not, stick to smaller wheels...
Why?
Well, as to acceleration, going to a +1 (17") wheel size of the same wheel and tire will add about .1 second to your zero-to-60 time. A +2 (18") will add another .1 second. This is far more than any cold-air intake or muffler will buy back.
Then there is braking - the effects of heavy wheels on stopping and slowing distances are equivalent to that on acceleration. I prefer being able to stop faster and in less distance.
Next, handling - larger wheels will cut down on your adhesion to the road, for two reasons: a lower-sidewall tire is less compliant, and loses contact on bumps, and the heavier wheel can't get out of the way on bumps or extend into dips fast enough to maintain contact. Bottom line is that you lose lateral grip with a larger wheel. If you doubt this, let me take you for a run on Rocky Point Road, west of Portland Oregon...
Finally, there's ride comfort - I personally want a car with go-kart-like handling, but there is no reason that should produce an ox-cart-like ride. A little more sidewall and less unsprung weight make a very big difference in ride comfort.
I kept the stock 16" wheels and all-season tires for winter use, as they are at least better on light snow than my summer tires.
I replaced them with 9-lb. 15x7" SSR Comp wheels and 205x55 Michelin Pilot Exalto tires. A 17lb. per corner weight reduction, and a HUGE all-around upgrade.
Even if you feel moved to use 16" or 17" wheels, you can easily shave 10-12 lbs. per corner by getting lightweight wheels and non-runflat tires. This needn't break the bank - tirerack.com, for example, tells you the weight of their wheels in the size you want - you can get 13 lb. Kosei Racing wheels in 15x7" size for as little as $109, and Yoko ES-100 tires are around $70.

- Second priority is engine-only upgrades. First, realize that the usual intake and exhaust mods are only effective at higher RPM - say over 3500. Below that speed, the engine gets as much fuel-air mixture as it can use. A pulley change can give higher boost even at lower RPM, but much of the benefit is wasted because the intake air gets hotter.
So what's the second item on my upgrade list? For me, the benefit of a cold-air intake is counter-balanced by the cost and additional supercharger whine you will hear - if I want to listen to that sort of noise, I'll whistle while I drive. However, there is some merit in reducing intake restrictions, and a K&N panel air filter replacement in the stock airbox at under $50 is a no-brainer. Expected gain would be in the range of 2-3% more power, mainly at higher RPM, but the price is right.

- Third priority for me is to get more fuel/air mixture through the engine, and the best way to do that without adding the racket of an open exhaust is to replace the intercooler. For the cost of a decent cat-back, an Alta intercooler and shroud will add more power, will do it at all engine speeds, and without any added noise. Unlike an exhaust system, it is also easily set back to stock, should I have engine or warrantee issues. If you don't want to spend the price of a new intercooler, their intercoolerr air diverter for the stock IC looks like a winner at $160.

- Finally, and not currently in my plan, with a better intercooler, a pulley change might make sense. If you do so, an ECU mod would definitely be needed at the same time, to make the engine both safer and tune the mixture for maximum benefit.

So that's my story. I believe that these changes will make the most cost-effective sense for what I want from my car. Your requirements and your mileage may vary...

[tradiuz]

Why not do the ECU first? With the MTH tuner you can get free updates as you go, so you always have it running best. That way you get all the power out of the mods!

[OldRick]

Until you upgrade more than just the air filter and the intercooler, there is little reason to mess with the ECU.

The air filter replacement is about like putting a new filter in to replace a dirty one, and the intercooler just cools the intake charge, and makes the car think that the weather must be cooler.

IMHO, Unless you are desperate to get those last three foot-pounds, I wouldn't fool with having a remote party "upgrade" the fuel maps. This sort of "tuning" is something that is properly done in conjunction with dyno testing of your car, and necessary only if you make drastic changes, like changing the boost levels.

[Stevie B]

Quote: Originally Posted by OldRick

I kept the stock 16" wheels and all-season tires for winter use, as they are at least better on light snow than my summer tires.
I replaced them with 9-lb. 15x7" SSR Comp wheels and 205x55 Michelin Pilot Exalto tires. A 17lb. per corner weight reduction, and a HUGE all-around upgrade.

I concur wholeheartedly about keeping wheels smaller in diameter to save weight and increase ride quality (without sacrificing grip) is the way to go. I wish I had thought more into this when ordering my '05 MCS. If so, I would have ordered all the Sport Package options individually, less the 17" wheels. I wouldn't have saved much money, but I would have the R84 X-lites (V-spokes) instead--which I've grown to really appreciate and like for an OEM wheel. The R84 combo would have given me a 6 lb. per wheel/tire savings over the S-spokes. Instead I opted for the 17" R99 wheels (for $300 extra), which only netted a 3 lb. savings per wheel/tire over the S-spokes. While not substantial, I was looking to save weight in the 17" size when I should have gone a step further and opted for the R84s. In the end, I now have the R84s as I just purchased them (new) with Dunlop M-3 Run Flat winter tires (package deal available in Germany). I may sell the R99s with the Dunlop 9000s (now with 2,500 miles) and just opt to put summer rubber on the R84s after winter. BTW, you quoted that you saved 17 lbs. per wheel/tire vs. the 16" R84s. In fact, you saved 11 lbs. You saved 8 lbs per wheel and 3 lbs by sheading the Dunlop Run Flats for the Michelins. 11 lbs. is significant, but I'm sticking with Run Flat rubber for now. Also, as for you not wanting to increase the volume of the whine of the super charger via a CAI so as to not interfere with music listening, would that music be the Electric Light Orchestra? I noticed your MINI name is ELO. If that's the case, I'd opt for the loudest CAI on the market.

Cheers!

[minigolf]

I wanna see a test done for the 0-100 times.

Same driver, same car, same day, same strip, just change the wheels.

[OldRick]

"I noticed your MINI name is ELO." My car is Yellow - spell out the name quickly...

As to the 0-60 times, one of the car rags, I believe SCC, performed just such a test 6-7 years ago, using Acuras I believe. Results were as cited - straight line performance went down, and handling got worse as the wheels got bigger. I took a quick look, but couldn't find the article on their web site.

This isn't exactly rocket science: you can calculate the inertia added by weight at the radius of the wheels and tires, and conclude that adding wheel/tire weight is equivalent to adding 2-3x as much non-moving weight to the car. On that basis, the 68 lbs. my setup saved is equivalent to tossing out an adult male passenger - about 8% of the total weight of the car. Surprise - adding 200 lbs. will slow a car 2600 lb. car noticably!

Re. weight savings, we weighed the standard US wheel/tire combo at Rasmussen Mini - they weighed just over 46 lbs. My combo came in at just over 29.

Here's a couple of quotes from a feature article at http://www.sportcompactcarweb.com/fe...ini/index.html

"... and hefty 17-inch wheels with run-flat tires... The Cooper S had locked itself solidly into fourth place until we happened to drive another S with the standard 16-inch wheels. It was so much faster, the Mini ended up tied with the SVT Focus."
- and -
" First three things we'd modify
1: 15-inch wheels and a AAA card
The 17-inch wheels on our test car are stupid. They look silly, weigh a ton, and slow the car remarkably. The brakes are small enough for 15-inch wheels, which, with well-chosen rubber, could save close to 100 lb."

[minigolf]

Wow. Even if I saw it I still wouldn't believe it.

[Stevie B]

Quote: Originally Posted by OldRick

Re. weight savings, we weighed the standard US wheel/tire combo at Rasmussen Mini - they weighed just over 46 lbs. My combo came in at just over 29.

Right. The stock S-spokes with Dunlop Run Flats are 46 lbs. each. From your thread, I comprehended you swapped 16" R84s with stock Run Flats for the SSR Comps and Michelins, which equates to 11 lbs per corner. A significant savings nonetheless. If I were willing to spend more money in that direction, I would opt for a lighter wheel for the MCS than the R84s I just purchased for winter. But to save another 3~4 lbs. per wheel, I'd have to spend around $1,200 to $1,600 (for what I'd want--16" O.Z. or forged BBS). Considering how inexpensive the R84 is, there's hardly a better choice if cost is a consideration. I'm looking forward to next month when I mount my R84s to see if the ride quality improves as a potential guage to stay with or go back to the 17" wheels in the summer. I'm leaning toward staying with the R84s at this point, and as a bonus, my R99s are quite marketable. BTW, have you noticed your ride height is .5" lower with your 15" combo? The outer diameter of the Michelins you mounted is exactly .5" less than the Dunlops on your 16" wheels. Interesting, eh? Now you've lowered the CG too, another plus in your favor.

Cheers!

[Bilbo Baggins]

Quote: Originally Posted by Stevie B

Right. The stock S-spokes with Dunlop Run Flats are 46 lbs. each. From your thread, I comprehended you swapped 16" R84s with stock Run Flats for the SSR Comps and Michelins, which equates to 11 lbs per corner. A significant savings nonetheless. If I were willing to spend more money in that direction, I would opt for a lighter wheel for the MCS than the R84s I just purchased for winter. But to save another 3~4 lbs. per wheel, I'd have to spend around $1,200 to $1,600 (for what I'd want--16" O.Z. or forged BBS). Considering how inexpensive the R84 is, there's hardly a better choice if cost is a consideration. I'm looking forward to next month when I mount my R84s to see if the ride quality improves as a potential guage to stay with or go back to the 17" wheels in the summer. I'm leaning toward staying with the R84s at this point, and as a bonus, my R99s are quite marketable. BTW, have you noticed your ride height is .5" lower with your 15" combo? The outer diameter of the Michelins you mounted is exactly .5" less than the Dunlops on your 16" wheels. Interesting, eh? Now you've lowered the CG too, another plus in your favor.

Cheers!

Since the R84s are the real "stock" wheel for the MCS the actual cost is $0.00.

The "diameter" is .5" less, lowering the CG by .25" not the .5" you mentioned. It is the radius that determines the amount lowered.

[Stevie B]

Quote: Originally Posted by Bilbo Baggins

Since the R84s are the real "stock" wheel for the MCS the actual cost is $0.00. The "diameter" is .5" less, lowering the CG by .25" not the .5" you mentioned. It is the radius that determines the amount lowered.

Yes...I stand corrected in ref to the ride height (good catch). Anyway, my thought behind the R84s was mainly directed at all those like me that missed the opportunity to buy them up front and actually save money vs. the portly S-spokes. There seems to be far more Americans opting for the Sport Package than not based on my observations (I rarely see a MCS with R84s, and I live in a place that has an unusually high volume of MCSs per capita thanks in great part to the BMW Military Sales Program). Buying a new set of R84s as an after thought is fairly cheap compared to aftermarket and of course they are easily sourced second hand from new owners that strip them off right away to buy aftermarket. I guess the disappointing piece to the whole equation is that MINI chose such a heavy wheel for their 17" OEM Sport Package. Even the new Web Spokes are nearly as heavy, which is another reason I opted for the R99s (1 lb. lighter, $200 cheaper for the set, and something other than the typical S-spoke!). For sure the best 17" wheel has got to be the Bullets, all things "performance" considered. Look good and almost 2 lbs. lighter than my R99s, which makes them nearly 5 lbs. lighter than the S-spokes. Now another interesting argument about light weight wheels is how light is too light? Is there such thing? There's got to be a point where too light is a detriment. Similar to light flyweels in that there's a con to the pro--loss of driveability for street use (rough power characteristics, etc.).

[OldRick]

Everything is relative - the weight savings depend on what you compare to, as you point out.

Not to split the hair too finely, I just weighed the tires that came on my US-spec S, and got 42.5 lbs. for the combo pictured, with air, valve stem and center cap - I don't know what the three-character designation is.

My SSR Comp 15x7" weighed 9 lbs, and with the Michelin PE's I weighed them at 29.5 with the same scale, for a 13-lb savings per corner.

You are correct on the ride height being lowered - I had thought that the standard tire was a 195x50, so I have indeed lowered the car by a quarter-inch, and lowered the overall gear ratio by a bit over 2% - equivalent to about 4 ft-lbs of torque - about the same as a costly aftermarket intake...

Boy, just knowing that, it feels even faster...

[rkw]

Quote: Originally Posted by minigolf

I wanna see a test done for the 0-100 times.
Same driver, same car, same day, same strip, just change the wheels.

Here's a thread where they progressively stripped a car of weight and checked the change in acceleration: http://forums.vwvortex.com/zerothread?id=776885

Their first step was to change 19" wheels for 15"
Before:
Curb Weight:2,762 lbs 1/4 Mile:16.3 @ 84.0 mph 60-foot:2.9 sec. 0-60 mph:8.6 sec.
After:
Curb Weight:2,707 lbs 1/4 Mile:16.0 @ 85.5 mph 60-foot:2.8 sec. 0-60 mph:8.1 sec.

The rest of the thread is a fun and amusing read as they proceeded to take everything off the car.

[minigolf]

Quote: Originally Posted by OldRick

Not to split the hair too finely, I just weighed the tires that came on my US-spec S, and got 42.5 lbs. for the combo pictured, with air, valve stem and center cap - I don't know what the three-character designation is.

Well, that is something we can agree on. When I weighed my 16" X-lites, with runflats, they came in at 19kg on the scales I used.

42.5lb = 19.32kgs.

[minigolf]

Quote: Originally Posted by rkw

Here's a thread where they progressively stripped a car of weight and checked the change in acceleration: http://forums.vwvortex.com/zerothread?id=776885

Their first step was to change 19" wheels for 15"
Before:
Curb Weight:2,762 lbs 1/4 Mile:16.3 @ 84.0 mph 60-foot:2.9 sec. 0-60 mph:8.6 sec.
After:
Curb Weight:2,707 lbs 1/4 Mile:16.0 @ 85.5 mph 60-foot:2.8 sec. 0-60 mph:8.1 sec.

The rest of the thread is a fun and amusing read as they proceeded to take everything off the car.

Yeah, I've read that thread (I've been on the Tex for about 3 years now), it's a great read.

So, 0-60mph was 0.5 second better after losing 25kgs (55lbs) ... hmm, maybe I better go on a diet.

[OldRick]

That is a very funny article, with a lot of grains of truth in it.

Colin Chapman, very successful racer and founder of Lotus (the car, not the spreadsheet) has been widely quoted for his comment "To go faster, add lightness".

His cars have always embodied the philosophy.