[1320autos]

As I said yesterday in one of the other post while going to work I wa arguing with myself which was the best route to go.

So if you want to dicuss this further you can either do it here, or here;

MINI COOPER :: North American Motoring - 315WHP no M45 or NOS...

One of the coolist things to happen to the power hungry Mini community this year is Jan and Hubie hooking up togeather again. At least I dont have to think before I speak to either of them now.(more space in my brain for other things now)

"this also signals a reunion of sorts - the original team of like minded and extremely dedicated and talented individuals that will stop at nothing in order to create the most comprehensive catalog of MINI performance products and accessories that the community has ever seen....."
__________________

[Ant FR]

my opinion, on a small engine its got to be Turbo all the way. The efficiency of a turbo just means it will suit the small engine so much better.

Superchargers traditionally are more suited to big V8's. Although its strange to see that some manufacturers are dumping power adders on the top end cars and sticking to the old increase the capacity method. Ie the new Vauxhall VXR8 they are dumping the supercharger option on the 6.0 and just dropping in the 7.0 litre.

speaking of small engine and turbo, heres one for ya Paul,
Fiat : FIAT SEICENTO 1.4 UNO TURBO ENGINE!

[minicabrio]

.....and Mercedes gradually killing off the 5.5 litre supercharged V8 ('55 AMG) in favour of the normally aspirated 6.2 V8 ('63 AMG)

I like the efficiency of the turbo, but prefer the noise of a supercharger Not just on the Cooper S, but the Ford GT, the AMG Mercs, and the tuned Mustangs

[mikeythemini]

But what about an electric supercharger - more efficient than either?

[batou]

Quote: Originally Posted by minicabrio (original)

I like the efficiency of the turbo, but prefer the noise of a supercharger Not just on the Cooper S, but the Ford GT, the AMG Mercs, and the tuned Mustangs

Ditto, that SC Mustang on I Am Legend sounded awesome...

I can totally see the Turbo is technically the better solution power and economy wise but it just ruins the character of the car, everyone I've given a ride or a lift loves the sound of the charger and it's the first thing they mention. I think without the video game esque engine note I'm sure it wouldn't be as much fun, it becomes more of a serious car than a comedy car.

[MINI-Morgan]

I vote Rotrex Just to be different but will give better low end torque but require less power to turn

[GTT 280]

i depends on your budget. SCharger is perfectly fine, and can offer superb results. but if you have the cash and skill, then the turbo route is the way to go. Comparatively it's kinder to the engine than a supercharger - but they both offer good results. Superchargers are kind of rare on small cars, so far that reason i think the MCS is cool. but for severe track performance it has to be a turbo. It just depends how mad you are.

They all create big smiles.

Cheers,
K.

[Revolution Mini Works]

great thread to start Paul

the reason we have 3 types of base applications is simply this:

no 1 system is PERFECT for EVERYONE

depending upon your driving style is which system you go for.

for unmatched torque when you want it and driveability the M45 powered Stroker is the way

for unmatched hp the turbo is your choice

for best track inlet temps the Rotrex is the way. Cool linear power to the ground

each have their own merits and no one kit is perfect for anyone.

Now think of these possibilities.....

stroker/turbo
stroker rotrex

[captint]

Quote: Originally Posted by GTT 270 (original)

i depends on your budget. SCharger is perfectly fine, and can offer superb results. but if you have the cash and skill, then the turbo route is the way to go. Comparatively it's kinder to the engine than a supercharger - but they both offer good results. Superchargers are kind of rare on small cars, so far that reason i think the MCS is cool. but for severe track performance it has to be a turbo. It just depends how mad you are.

They all create big smiles.

Cheers,
K.

I was alwayd told super chargers were a safer option that turbos, less chance of detenation etc

[1320autos]

Could you post those dyno plots comparing the stroker v turbo

[Revolution Mini Works]

Quote: Originally Posted by 1320autos (original)

Could you post those dyno plots comparing the stroker v turbo

here you go

different strokes for different folks

[batou]

Personally, this is worth it for the sound... if my car was a second car track day jobber this is how it would sound... *drool*....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tJjsGGbh98U

"RMW head/header, flowmaster resonator, modified Borla Race, custom dual 3" exhaust, soft launch, no speed shifting..." or in one word... "AWESOME"!

[MINI-Morgan]

Quote: Originally Posted by captint (original)

I was alwayd told super chargers were a safer option that turbos, less chance of detenation etc

Less heat in the chamber is probably what they are thinking But a turbo can get the same HP at lower boost so surely thats safer.

[Rigsey]

Quote: Originally Posted by Revolution Mini Works (original)

great thread to start Paul

the reason we have 3 types of base applications is simply this:

no 1 system is PERFECT for EVERYONE

depending upon your driving style is which system you go for.

for unmatched torque when you want it and driveability the M45 powered Stroker is the way

for unmatched hp the turbo is your choice

for best track inlet temps the Rotrex is the way. Cool linear power to the ground

each have their own merits and no one kit is perfect for anyone.

Now think of these possibilities.....

stroker/turbo
stroker rotrex

You also need to consider the depth of the owners pockets

Is there much re-use between kits, i.e. change from one to another?

[Revolution Mini Works]

Quote: Originally Posted by Rigsey (original)

You also need to consider the depth of the owners pockets

Is there much re-use between kits, i.e. change from one to another?

sure

the cylinder head is an intergral part of it

injectors are the same, exhaust the same on the rotrex/stroker

[Revolution Mini Works]

here is another comparison of the stroker/turbo

as we said before......different strokes for different folks

look at the differences of where you normally drive

3,000rpm 218.8 ft lbs of torque and 124whp of the stroker

vs..... 137.5 ft lbs of torque and 80.2whp


thats 81.3 ft lbs of torque and 44.2 whp!!!

go on up the RPM range and look at the graphs

it will be fun to have Paul drag our stroker car to see how fast it really is

[1320autos]

I completely forgot about twin charging as well;

YouTube - MCS Dyno

Pay attention to the conversation, this sums up Hubie's life / obsession, and believe me he's not joking

[Bhozar]

So power tends to drop off after 5k RPM with the stroker, while with the turbo it doesnt start really building until 3.5k RPM. Am I reading that right? Any graphs comparing it to the M45, then a combo of all of them with the Stroker?

[Revolution Mini Works]

Quote: Originally Posted by 1320autos (original)

I completely forgot about twin charging as well;

YouTube - MCS Dyno

Pay attention to the conversation, this sums up Hubie's life / obsession, and believe me he's not joking

aaaahhhhhh....... the good ol days of us breaking new barriers

how many yrs ago was that? ROFLMAO

[Revolution Mini Works]

Quote: Originally Posted by Bhozar (original)

So power tends to drop off after 5k RPM with the stroker, while with the turbo it doesnt start really building until 3.5k RPM. Am I reading that right? Any graphs comparing it to the M45, then a combo of all of them with the Stroker?

Power doesn't drop off, it's the torque falling off as it does on all engines

the stroker is a M45 car