[ScatPackMopars]

I have researched the fact that Chrysler and BMW devloped the 1.6Ltr engine that is currently used in the New Mini....I have found out that Chrysler was the lead engineering group of the new engine. Chrylser desgined the engine using their computer based development technique where the entire engine can be designed and simulated using computer models. Chrysler is the first company to ever design a new car using this computer based design [The Intrepid] and they used this technique in designing the new HEMI! From my understanding this engine in the Mini is world class in the areas of economy and refinement. I also found out that this same engine can be found in the Chrylser Neon's that are imported to Europe [you can also get a 1.8 and a 2.0 in the European Neon] After the merger of Daimler and Chrysler the cooperation between BMW and Chrysler ended but the 1.6 being produced by BMW is the same engine. Maybe if things would have worked out we could have had the BMWChrysler Group instead of the DaimlerChrysler Group.

[obehave]

Pretty close.
I think you'll get some debate on this statement though " From my understanding this engine in the Mini is world class in the areas of economy and refinement"
Economy isn't all that great, which is in line with most Chrysler engines. And the VTEC crowd can rightfully debate the refinement part.

Don't get me wrong, I've been a MOPAR guy most of my life. My first car in '73 was a Duster 340.

Honestly had no idea Chrysler designed the engine when I bought my MINI.
If I could have gotten the same HP per Cube in my 340 as I get in this 1.6 I'd have been a very happy guy. 560+ HP Wooo Hoo!!

[markjenn]

I think the engine's main claim to fame is its very small size and toughness. Otherwise, it's pretty average to below average in smoothness, economy and power. It is certainly acceptable and the supercharger in the MCS gives it a neat funky personality, but if I could swap it out with the 200-hp VTEC motor in a TSX/EuroAccord, I'd do it in a heartbeat.

- Mark

[BRGreenie]

There are hundreds of people on this forum who are more qualified to talk about this than me, but I do know that when MINI was launched a lot of journalists critisised the engine as being the weakest part of the package. Whether that was because it was a compromise because there were no suitable BMW units at the time I don't know, Critisised points were a certain lack of refinement and thrashyness at certain rev ranges - maybe they were comparing BMWs engine record in the past and were disapointed.

The forthcoming new engine for the mini (2005?) seems to get people excited though.

[obehave]

Honda................The small block Chevy of the new generation

[Paul]

http://www.tritecmotors.com.br/engli...nt_venture.htm

[SteveM3]

Don't believe what people claim for computers.
Lots of modern cars have a diagnostic port that allows your cars computer
to tell a technician of any fault or so they claim. It doesn't work though unless
a car stalling and refusing to restart is not considered a problem. (An Astra
but don't believe it can't happen on a Mini)

The mini engine in S guise is coarse and lacks top end zip. It certainly
isn't a small BMW engine. However the Mini is good value so maybe
BMW use it because it's cheap by their standards. They probably also
went in to the adventure to use a new plants engine capacity.

to exaggerated claims for computers. Their best use
is to work with people not instead of them.

[ScatPackMopars]

A computer designed item is only as good as the input product. The quickness and refinement allowed by the use of the computer programs is what made Chrysler such a desired partner. That is one of the main reasons Daimler and Chrysler merged. Modern day Chrysler engines do not lack refinement or power The 2.4 in the SRT4 and the HEMI are cases in point.

[obehave]

Quote: Originally Posted by ScatPackMopars

A computer designed item is only as good as the input product. The quickness and refinement allowed by the use of the computer programs is what made Chrysler such a desired partner. That is one of the main reasons Daimler and Chrysler merged. Modern day Chrysler engines do not lack refinement or power The 2.4 in the SRT4 and the HEMI are cases in point.

For MOPAR nostsalgia the Hemi is cool but it's still a push rod, 2 valve per cyl. V8. The MDS(Cadillac did a so so job of this over 20 years ago) looks cool and we'll seee how that plays out (I'm rooting for it) but the whole thing doesn't appear to have groundbreaking refinements. Besides, by it's design the Hemi isn't (wasn't ?) a decent street engine

Web quote
The Hemi design combustion chamber is one of the poorest designs for emissions-why do you think it took so long to get it into production? It almost did NOT make emissions test requirements even with the modifications. NOx is the problem due to the cool temp flame front inherent in the design (also why it builds so much torque). There is also a little problem called "flame quench" (which causes additional NOx) with a true Hemi design, as was used on the V16 aircraft engine and the automotive engines produced in the 1950s. Today's Hemi is that (a "Hemi") in name only.

Don't know doo about the 2.4.

[RickB]

I think the S engine is quite smooth, and while it makes adequate power, it is certainly nothing ground-breaking.
I remember when I got my Sentra in '92, with an all-aluminum, fuel injected, twin cam engine; ten years earlier, the only cars with that kind of spec were Ferrrari and Lotus. In that light, an iron block, SOHC, and 100hp/liter doesn't seem very advanced, ten years later. I'd like to see the S with 200hp, but the way things go in the car business, it would come only with a hefty weight increase, that would eat most of the gain. I noticed the last S tested in R&T magazine, admittedly with just about every possible option, had a test weight of over 2900 pounds!

[dav]

I love the Tritec. Simple and durable. No timing belt either (chain). Great gas mileage and great performance. A 10 year old can replace the spark plugs. Here is a photo of the base 115hp Cooper engine, not the "S"....

[SteveS]

the engine has received some awards. I found this link describing its design highlights:
http://idisk.mac.com/thezachs/Public/MCS_Powertrain.pdf.

Don't know if if you can see it as I downloaded it months ago.


I haven't heard any mechanical problems concerning the S engine despite the frequency and extent of modification.

[BruceK]

Quote: Originally Posted by Paul Mullett

http://www.tritecmotors.com.br/english/tritec/joint_venture.htm

A quote from the Tritec site:

• "This High Performance Derivative of Tritec's 1.6L engine was recently named by Ward´s Auto World Magazine as one of the 10 best engines in the world for model year 2003. The 16-valve, supercharged, 4-cylinder, in line engine powers the award winning BMW Mini Cooper S, delivering a modest 163 bhp at 6,000 rpm.

..... modest 163 bhp...

Gee, I realize it's not the world's most powerful engine, but it is the most powerful Tritec makes. But what gives with the "modest" remark? Translation error?

[MINIGT50]

Yeah it might not be the smoothest engine in the world, but I do like the Tritec engine in my MCS. For one thing, everything I've heard is that you can tap out the engine quite a bit with mods without needing any internal beefing up. It delivers pwoer fairly consistently once it gets into it's torque range, but one thing we must remember is how long 1st gear is in the S, which doesn't help. I also happen to think the way it sounds suits the personality of my car well, and lastly 100hp/liter out of such a simple engine is not that bad at all.