[punkeyfunky]

Well, I finally got around to testing the OneClick in a semi-scientific test.

I have an '03 Cooper CVT. I bought the OneClick, hoping to get a little extra power. I knew gains wouldn't be huge, as the Cooper lump is already fairly well sorted, and it won't do that much more power without more work (throttle body, valve work or forced induction).
CoolNew advised that the maximum gain would be around 8-10bhp.

After buying the OneClick, getting it working (duh, that was my fault), and then switching to the 'performance' map, I didn't notice any difference.
I went back to AmD, last month, and they uploaded what they called 'a more aggressive map'.

This weekend, I borrowed a testing meter, an AP22, one of these:
http://www.race-technology.com/WebPa.../AP22Home.html

My "test" was to determine if the performance map was providing real world differences. The 0-60mph test is fairly quick and eay to perform.

Of course, a 0-60 test with a manual 'box (thats the tranny, for our US friends) means that a lot of variation is possible due to the way the driver performs takeoff and then changes up (as demonstrated by the person driving the S that was with me...)

These variations don't necessarily exist with the CVT. For each run, I put the car in 'manual' mode, in first gear. Crucially, the CVT box will automatically upshift when the revs hit the 6000rpm redline. Because this is computer controlled, it means that there is no variation from me, and thus, driver input is effectively ruled out.
Oh, and I didn't floor the pedal past the detent (which holds the revs as high as possible).

For this test, I wasn't to worried about the overall 0-60 time. Given that the car was running a 3/4 full tank of petrol(gas) and carrying two people, I didn't expect the 'quickest' possible time. I was far more interested in the differences between the 'standard' and 'performance' maps.

By running the same car, same load, same starting position, down the same stretch of road, the only differences should be down to the maps in use.

Upon arriving at the test location, my car was 'rested' whilst we scoped out the test area.
I then performed four runs on the 'standard' map, let the car rest for 30 minutes or so, then switch to the 'performance' map, and do another four runs.

The best run in each case was the first (both with ASC switched off):

Standard map - 11.88s
Performance map - 11.75s
(plotted chart attached - red=standard, green=performance)

Conclusions:
Hardly a massive difference...

I accept that any differences the OneClick might make may not be 'visible' in a straight 0-60 test. Likewise, I know that it's possible for the CVT box to soak up some of the power coming from the engine (more so than a manual transmission).

The OneClick 'does what it says on the tin' - that is, it enables you to switch between two 'maps' at will, so in that respect, it works.
However, the performance gains from the performance map, particularly, the 'more agressive' map provided by AmD, appear to be invisible on my car.

The OneClick performance maps are likely to provide a more pronounced difference on a One, or S, with a manual transmission, but I can't prove or deny that either way.

The only thing I can say is that in my experience, the money I have spent on purchasing a OneClick for a Cooper CVT might be better invested elsewhere.

Next steps:
I'll speak to AmD and see what they say. I figure that if I choose to go down the road of other 'performance' mods (valves, throttle, turbo, whatever) then the OneClick may be able to provide a more visible difference. That remains to be tested

Thoughts and comments appreciated.


-Lee

[rdash]

Thanks for that. At least what I was told by AMD and what you found are much the same. Have you done any other mods to improve breathing of lump? Even with MC and CVT there must be a point when cumulative effects become noticeable.
Regards

[punkeyfunky]

Quote:

Have you done any other mods to improve breathing of lump? Even with MC and CVT there must be a point when cumulative effects become noticeable.

Yup, K&N induction kit (with a little ducting to help get the air to the filter, and a PlayMINI cat back.

After that was the OneClick, based on the fact that it "improves drivability and mid range" (as opposed to masses of extra power). I've not noticed any difference since the OneClick, hence the testing above.

Next? Valves, throttle body, turbo... We'll see

-Lee

[Paul]

Quote: Originally Posted by punkeyfunky

Of course, a 0-60 test with a manual 'box (thats the tranny, for our US friends) means that a lot of variation is possible due to the way the driver performs takeoff and then changes up (as demonstrated by the person driving the S that was with me...)

Hey! The tyres were dirty... it was hot.. I was under pressure...

[punkeyfunky]

Quote: Originally Posted by Paul Mullett

Hey! The tyres were dirty... it was hot.. I was under pressure...

Ah - that wasn't intended as a criticism of you... just an observation that results can be varied. Although the 3rd take off was your best... and it went...

-Lee

[Paul]

It was interesting to see actually. I was quite shocked at how the car warming up also seemed to slow down the "shifts" in the CVT so much between runs 2,3 and 4 each time.

[punkeyfunky]

Quote: Originally Posted by Paul Mullett

It was interesting to see actually. I was quite shocked at how the car warming up also seemed to slow down the "shifts" in the CVT so much between runs 2,3 and 4 each time.

Probably something to do with the belt and grip on the pulleys. Probably...

Looks like I'll have to try something more, er, involved to increase power. Worst part is, I've seen the article in the new goMINI magazine on flowed heads... me want!

-Lee

[nonsequitur]

I am still worried that we are all using, as an undisputed "fact", the throttle pedal position differences for the CVT observed on the dynometer last year without further objective testing. There is one set of positions where those rules might get tripped up:

If you are using the Steptronic manual selection, then the gearbox "shifts" at 6000rpm anyway, so it should not matter if the throttle pedal is held at the resistance point ("CVT-mode") or if it is floored (AT-mode"). This creates a question: which is better?

These two combinations have not been tested to determine if there is a difference between them based solely on throttle position. This hit me when reading your process description for your tests at the beginning.

Many people have confirmed the dyno tests that there is an important difference between CVT-mode and AT-mode throttle positions in Drive and SportDrive. CVT-mode (throttle held at the resistance point; about 7/8 throttle) is quicker acceleration in either D or SD selection, because the gearbox is very smoothly doing its job with the motor at steady maximum power. The sensation and acceleration is native "CVT", not the stepped Automatic Transmission simulation from the software.

[Paul]

We were not so much going for fastest (although we assumed that was the quickest way), but more of the back to back "same conditions".

I'll upload those PDFs soon, with any luck today. I'm out playing in the S most of the day though. I mean, testing and planning in the S.

[nonsequitur]

I like that you're developing first hand driving impressions in the S; which bring canny insight, revived energy, and Good Stories to this website.

Thanks for calming me on the possible hole in our understanding of the best acceleration from Steptronic. It just hit me when reading punkeyfunky's notes, which were clear about seeking repeated comparable times focused on OneClick.

Underneath all the words he still wants MORE?!

[punkeyfunky]

Quote: Originally Posted by nonsequitur

...Underneath all the words he still wants MORE?!

Of course! As much as I can afford!

-Lee

[SoggyCornFlakes]

interesting stuff Lee - be good to see what AMD havce to say about it.

[paddy]

Just came across this thread. I also have purchased a One Click for my Cooper. While I a 5 speed and not CVT so my results are a little different.

First of all, I do not have dyno results to back what I am stating, other than my own experience in my Cooper. SOmeday when I find the time and the extra $'s I may get a dyno run in.

• Engine no longer sluggish starting off with the AC on. This is a plus for me.
• From my records it appears that my mpg may have increased by just under 3 mpg
• The power bandwidth now starts in the 3500rpm range, vice the normal 4500rpm range
• Overall the Cooper is more responsive

paddy

[Scby555]

I have not purchased this yet, but what I will say is, if you own a cooper 8-10BHP will not even be noticable on the road. I would not buy this if you want MORE power. I would buy this if you want a more responsive, more drivable car, which on the road is where is counts.

[Jeffy]

I refuse to just drop it at that. That is a problem that can be corrected. I have been hot-rodding cars in the U.S. for years, and people love automatic transmissions here, so I've had to learn how to keep them from slowing me down. The CVT is a new animal for me, so I need to learn how it works, how it's built, etc. Can you tell me what kind of lubricant/ hydraulic fluid is used in these "gearboxes"? Maybe it doesn't hold up well to heat and it could be replaced by a more capable (synthetic?) lubricant. Please share! -Jeffy.

[nonsequitur]

There are another Thread or two where this lubricant has been discussed. There is a reference in the ZF reference document in the CVT Forum (as a sticky).

Here's one of the Threads; CVT Lubricant