Its been a very long time since I posted with you guys I defected to the BMW camp for a little while but the extortionate tax bill I get from the tax man has made me look at joining the fold once again.
I'll keep it simple.
Company car - hence tax is important
Had a 210BHP JCW Works - love it to bits on a 53 plate
Then moved to a fully loaded 3.0 Z4 54 plate love it but SMG tranny ruined its fun - you still cant beat a manual :-)
Now - thinking about a JCW again but from what I can hear the new JCW is not the snorting fire breathing monster my old JCW was - shall I just get a 2nd hand last edition of the old Supercharged version?
The new JCW has much lower company car tax but being such a fan of the old JCW i dont want to waste my time and money if its nowhere naer the same!
Feedback would me most appreciated you guys have always helped me out well in the past
I just swapped my 55 plate 210 JCW for a new R56 S with the JCW stage one kit on and while I am still running it in I am convinced it is faster than my old car especially where it matters in the mid range......and to be honest I think the R56 is a better car than the old R53. However it has lost a bit of character and the old car is a bit nicer to look at IMHO....
I chose the R56 over the old Works for the following reasons:
Much better MPG.
At the time I was looking late 2nd hand JCWs were just a fraction off the cost a new R56.
More comfortable ride, whilst still handling well on sports suspension.
More torque and so doesn't have to be thrashed to enjoy the performance.
Better built, though they can still rattle.
In short the R56 is the perfect hot hatch for me as I do a lot of commuting, and I chose the standard S over the prev gen JCW 210. Now I've ordered the tuning kit for my S driving will be a little bit more fun. Must admit I am getting the kit more for sound than the performance though.
Unless you thrashed it the old Words felt a bit gutless to me in everyday driving, yes it was nice to thrash around the twisties, but so is the R56.
At the end of the day you need to go drive them all, its your cash...
Don't get hung up on the numbers. The R56 is faster than the R53 MCS Works. Whether this is the extra torque or the slightly lower kerb weight or BMW being conservative with the power figures or less drive train losses or a combination of all.
Have to disagree here, yes the new R56 is up to 20% more fuel efficient than before but to say the older JCW S is slower and gutless compared to the newer R56 is off the mark. The old post facelift JCW S official 0-62 is 6.6, the R56 6.8, Torque is similar but the R56 probably feels quicker because it has an overboost on its turbo which pushes the torque lb/ft up although it obviously doesn't affect its time. The feel is also different, the JCW supercharged engine constantly pulls through all the gears whereas the R56 has to wait for the turbo to kick in and it is this sensation which seems like it is quicker. Don't buy either if you're worried about MPG and insurance as you will get hit quite hard by both.They are both very similar cars and to say that the new R56 is a lot faster isn't true and your also forgetting that all important difference which will have mini owners and others look differently at your mini, the John Cooper Works logo on the front and rear, along with red calipers, carbon fibre etc etc. And as Hamster once famously said, it gives one thing over other mini's, Pedigree!!!
Not sure this was aimed at my post, but i didn't say it was way faster, just faster. The published 0-62 figures are realistic for the R53 but many tests are achieving / beating these times with std. R56MCS so we can only assume the addition of the Works kit will improve further on these times.
I found the JCW 210 lacking when driving around town and starting to accelerate, maybe gutless was the wrong word to use. Admittedly my only experience with the old JCW was a few long test drives though. I had a Clio 172 at the time that responded better and pulled harder at lower revs, then I got the R56 S and that was even better. I have never experienced turbo lag in it either. Overboost only kicks in when flooring it and so is not relevant to my comments above.
The R56 can easily do 40MPG with motorway miles and it doesn't drop off that much if you include a bit of fun too. Personally I don't really care about performance figures, yes they are nice to boast about some times but the driving experience is much more important IMO. Not sure what your trying to say about the JCW badges, you can get JCW stuff for both generations. Also who cares what others think of your car?
I totally agree Japper, was more at kevkbuk who gave me the impression that you really needed to thrash the older JCW to get any decent response which isn't true. If you have an R56 with JCW kit then again there will only be marginal increases as Mini have found it harder to tweak more power out of the turbo engine as opposed to the Supercharged one, as can be seen in the BHP increases which, even with the JCW kit, don't match the 210 bhp of the old kit. However, performance wise even with less bhp, there isn't much difference.
Yeah I know you can get JCW stuff for both gen's, my point was to persuade 543kal to look at the JCW ( 1st or 2nd gen ) more than the standard S thats all and I agree that handling etc is more important. I care that my JCW looks good and people also like it for what it is, something different which all minis are.
Cheers all for the feedback so far great to hear some news from people in the know.
In terms of which version of Cooper S it would definately be a works that I would go for over the standard Cooper S - after having a 210BHP JCW before I feel I would sorely miss the extra grunt and gurgles and burbles from the exhaust with the seats down :-)
With regards to the new JCW my concerns are as pointed out the turbo although great on boost will loose the snappy response that the old Supercharged JCW had.....
Its a tough call my old one was one of the best cars i'd ever driven and have had some nice rides before ;-) The only other car I've had so much fun in was in a MKII Clio Williams yet again another raw car........ Is this telling me something.....I've always had this saying in my mind "Torque is cheap" if that makes any sense?
As much as it pains me to admit it when I had a standard R56 for the weekend it was quicker and more responsive around town, especailly when flooring it in 1st & 2nd, although from 3rd upwards I felt my 210 had the edge. However I have to admit the R56 was a quick car in standard form , *** the figures - cause driving both in ignorance of the stats I would never have gussed my 210 was the supposedly more powerful car. Things have moved on and the R56 really is an evolution in terms of performance even if it's proportions are lumpy and out shape IMHO, with a cheapened interior. (I can hear you R56 owners tapping away already)
i bought an r56 cooper s and traded it in after 3 months for one of the last R53s. Not a jcw but still a fantastic can - heavier on petrol and higher tax band but no regrets at all.
The R56 does feel faster but 0-60 not really that different. I just couldnt stand the ugliness of the R56 and the fact it was like driving any small hatch - it didnt feel special. I get so many complimnents about my R53 - noone bothered with the r56.
The AutoGuide.com network consists of the largest network of enthusiast-owned enthusiast-operated automotive communities.
AutoGuide.com provides the latest car reviews, auto show coverage, new car prices, and automotive news. The AutoGuide network operates more than 100 automotive forums where our users consult peers for shopping information and advice, and share opinions as a community.