[543kal]

Hi all,

I currently drive a BMW E46 325i and have been offered a Mini Cooper S with a John Cooper works conversion which I have taken up.

This little baby pushes out 200BHP compared to 192 for the BMW and I hope I've made the right decision!

My question is ------ can the Cooper S Works live with a Clio Williams in a point to point race?

I've sat in a Williams many a time and I absolutely love the car but I want to know how the Mini compares.....

Any ideas team?

[Hobbe]

According to EVO:

Renault Clio Williams ('93-'96)
150 bhp
0-60 mph: 7.6 s

MCS Works
197 bhp
0-60 mph: 6.7 s

[543kal]

Yup i was studying those figures earlier on hence I got the power to weight ratios from there.

One thing the Williams is amazing at is its power delivery. With a tuned 150BHP 2Litre lump in a car that is really light when you put your foot down it really flies and feels like a much more powerful car. I.e. if you accelerate hard in a straight line it goes all over the place and feels really raw!

Also bear in mind the Williams is a normal aspirated engine therefore its power delivery is far more linear as well as its not dependant on a Supercharger being for want of a better word - on boost or off boost.

Does the JCW feel like this?

[Hobbe]

You need to test drive the Works, it's the only way to find out if Works gives you that feeling you're after .

[ABG]

Quote: Originally Posted by 543kal

Hi all,

I currently drive a BMW E46 325i and have been offered a Mini Cooper S with a John Cooper works conversion which I have taken up.

This little baby pushes out 200BHP compared to 192 for the BMW and I hope I've made the right decision!

I switched from a 330 convertible (231 bhp 0-62 6.9secs) to a JCW S - the Works feels much faster especially in cornering. No idea about the Williams.

[Ginger]

The Clio Williams 1 is an all time hot hatch great, I remember driving one, and bar the original 172 it's the one Clio I'd consider owning (shame aboutr the flakey interior). I'm sure in time the Cooper S Works will attain the same status.
G

[Washy]

The JCW is a fun car to drive, but in common with most modern cars it is heavy. I am convinced my old Astra GTE 16v (156bhp) would actually kick my JCW's ass as it was much ligher......having said that most old hot hatches suffered from terminal torque steer and the unique ability to put you in the nearest ditch if you took too many liberties....
Never fortunate enough to drive a williams, but they do have a good reputation

[JDT]

I've just downsized to a JCW MCS from an E46 M3 and I can tell you I'm not that disappointed... Okay I am but it really is a great car. I'm sure that compared to an old #1 Clio Williams it's worlds ahead, even compared to my friends new Clio Cup it's a good car, heavy, yes but still massive fun and on a long point to point run there would be nothing in it at all.

At the end of the day it's your choice, you have to try both before you spend that hard earned cash don't take our word for it.

[543kal]

Thanks guys I cant wait to play with my new toy!

Have a read of this post from the Renault forum - good bunch of guys makes an interesting read:

http://forum.cliosport.net/display_t...1&ThreadPage=1

[smiffy]

Id have a Clio Williams anyday

[SteveM3]

Quote: Originally Posted by 543kal

Also bear in mind the Williams is a normal aspirated engine therefore its power delivery is far more linear as well as its not dependant on a Supercharger being for want of a better word - on boost or off boost.

I thought superchargers are always running so don't have an on or off boost. There are
turbos that take time to spin up to speed when you put your foot down. Certainly the
standard S and JCW S both feel very lively with plenty of low down pull. The JCW S
should be faster than the Williams but not by enough to make it loads more fun.

[543kal]

I havent got a clue really but going my theory the Supercharger must cut in and cut at at some point no? I'd be very suprised if all its power was available 100% of the time?

Am i wrong guys?

[Washy]

Quote: Originally Posted by 543kal

I havent got a clue really but going my theory the Supercharger must cut in and cut at at some point no? I'd be very suprised if all its power was available 100% of the time?

Am i wrong guys?

The roots type blower gives boost as long as the throttle is open. Once the throttle is lifted there is a bypass valve which diverts the air from the supercharger. I used to have a diagram of how the system works but I can't find it or i would have posted it up.

PS I am not an engineer, so someone out there may be able to give a bit more detail.

[gazcaddy]

Just a quick point renault performance figures seem to underestimate the car. For example every road test I have seen for the 182 its 0-60 times has been well under 7.1 (renault claim to 100km/ph) lowest 6.3, however the Cooper S road test seem to suggest that the cooper S is not as fast as BMW claims, normally about 7.6 in mags.

Therefore expect the williams to be faster than 7.6

Williams Power to weight ratio 152 bhp per tonne
Cooper S works (210 bhp) power to weight ratio around 170 bhp

i would imagine though that the MCS works would be slightly quicker point to point, wouldn't fancy the standard S chances though.

[speedynz]

543kal, the Clio Williams truly was a master in it's day, probably up with anything you could name. But engines, chassis and tyres have moved on since then.

'Point to point' is probably the most realistic term used for cross country speed in the right environment but the differences from car to car have always been difficult to quantify. After all who can truly say that they've ever been able to keep up a full on cross country assault for say 20 miles. With modern car performance the speeds attained would be ludicrous. A JCW can hit 100mph with a mere sniff of a straight and 120-130mph on the longer ones.

Having driven some accomplished but humble cars I can honestly say that the speed and incredible composure some of them can show is incredible. A case in point is the Ford Focus, no not the ST 170 or RS but a cooking 1.6 or 2.0 is just so adept, confidence inspiring and shrugs off lumps and adverse cambers so well that any car, no matter how good it's credentials would have a job getting much distance between itself and one of these.

Once you throw a few decent straights into the equation though the situation can become clearer and actual performance figures start to show their worth. This is where a JCW would prove it's mettle over this 90's icon.

On the right road, on the right day and with the right driver a Williams could live with a JCW but remove any one of those givens from the equation and the Mini would eat it alive.

I believe a JCW is in the 1st division as far as cross country ability is concerned, certainly faster than most modern Ferrari's and Lamborghini's. For the premier league, cars such as Mitsubishi Evolutions, Impreza WRX's and the wieldy 911's are untouchable due to their combination of size, poise, power and traction.

[RedUn]

quick answer....the JCW wud eat it no probs

my mates just got a williams after his valver an says it isn't much faster

back to the point....the williams does feel a quick car from how it gets its power down etc but the mini wud be faster even if it feels like it wont be!

as for the figures don't forget the torque difference between the cars too!

I don't really want to talk 0-60 but the mini wud have it any time as far as i'm concerned, i've seen sum 200bhp mini's do sum runs on the strip and they were faster than the quoted times for the JCW!

<puts on flame suit just incase> I also think a std S wud beat the williams too tho not quite as easy

[TheJesus]

I have a Clio Williams 2 and it's a great car. Okay it's old, but it's pretty reliable and the seats although may not to be everyones tastes are one of the best I have sat in, very comfy indeed.

In terms of comparing it against a JCW i think the JCW will be quicker in a straight line as standard, prolly quite comfortably... but this depends on the individual car. The problem (well, it's not really a problem..) with the Williams is that no two seem to be the same. Recently at RR days standard ones have been making anything from 150+bhp to 170+bhp at the fly... which is a big difference. Some seem to just loosen up better than others. Standard for standard the JCW will more than likely out perform it in most areas, like straight line, round a track. On the road however I cant see there being that much difference, as the Williams is more setup to be forgiving on un-even bumpy surfaces and is great at getting you out of trouble, as 90% of the torque is available at 2'500rpm, so based on the fact that road tax doesn't seem to go on road tax most of them are like a rally course! lol

I regard to book figures I think Reno quoted the 1.8 16v as being faster than the Williams to 62 mainly down to the fact that the Williams needs 3rd gear to hit 62mph... it will only do 54-56mph. This is different in road tests as the engines loosen up well and generally make more power and quicker 0-62 times.

As for Williams vs MCS it would probably be close to about 60, or when the Williams gets into 3rd, then the Willy will tend to pull from my own experience. Once I get my gearbox sorted out I don't mind having a friendly comparison or to take someone for a blast if you live near NW area