[GTT 280]

Hi,

I have searched the 0-60 thread, but no 210bhp time as yet.

Does anybody know what they are ?

(no extreme altitudes / high temperatures...)

 

[Rick38]

0-60 in 6.5 secs?

Well, you know most likely that's around the figure. Haven't found it either though.
Currently I am very happy with the old S-JCW set, but yes I will be buying the upgrade.

NOT for a better 0-60 performance though. As far as I am concerned these figures can be quoted at the bar.

First I thought the upgrade was a small CPU upload. Now I realise that a new cheap airfilter with a electrical valve and new fuel injectors will be installed.

This will give a better sound (more fun to drive) and top end boost which I always use when I want to overtake somebody.

I am sure this new set will give me great fun during driving and a whole lot of mental erection when passing people.

 

[GTT 280]

NOT for a better 0-60 performance though. As far as I am concerned these figures can be quoted at the bar.

So - does anybody know the 0-60 time ?

 

[rentagas]

according to the press release 0-62mph is 6.6 secs. (no 0-60 time published)
no published figures for cabrio
I am sure the times would be better if the front wheels stayed on the ground

 

[GTT 280]

according to the press release 0-62mph is 6.6 secs. (no 0-60 time published)
no published figures for cabrio
I am sure the times would be better if the front wheels stayed on the ground

Well, my mate has a SEAT Ibiza Cupra 1.8T with a stock BHP of 153.
This has been chipped to 206bhp and he reckons it does 5.5 seconds.

 

[Raify]

Well, my mate has a SEAT Ibiza Cupra 1.8T with a stock BHP of 153.
This has been chipped to 206bhp and he reckons it does 5.5 seconds.

Sounds a bit far-fetched, unless it's stripped out and very light. I had a 321bhp car (1440kgs), official 0-60 time was 5.7secs. Real world, probably 6. something.

the standard Leon Cupra R is 7.7 according to evo.co.uk

It should be easy to work out (for someone more technically minded than me!) the reduced 0-60 time should be, based on the increase in power. It won't be much, a tenth or two I should imagine.

 

[GTT 280]

Sounds a bit far-fetched, unless it's stripped out and very light. I had a 321bhp car (1440kgs), official 0-60 time was 5.7secs. Real world, probably 6. something.

the standard Leon Cupra R is 7.7 according to evo.co.uk

It should be easy to work out (for someone more technically minded than me!) the reduced 0-60 time should be, based on the increase in power. It won't be much, a tenth or two I should imagine.

Thought so.

It is a stock Ibiza Cupra with a chip. Apparently it weighs just under 1000kgs.
So there is no chance of it being less than 6.5 seconds then...

 

[roland2003]

O-60 is best left in the pub. Aside from variations in traction , IMO most SPEED traps
are pretty iffy anyway . The most accurate and IMO the best way, is to measure time elapsed over 2 beams you break at either end of a measured quarter mile .
eg Santa Pod .
PS traction still plays a part but as a percentage of the total time is less
You even get a ticket to prove your time. Anyone can go, no racing licence needed.

 

[Raify]

O-60 is best left in the pub.

I completely agree! I pay more attention to 30-70 type times when looking at new cars now. My previous car for example, has a time of 4.3!!! in Evo, no idea how they managed that! must have burned the clutch

 

[Bezza]

Well, my mate has a SEAT Ibiza Cupra 1.8T with a stock BHP of 153.
This has been chipped to 206bhp and he reckons it does 5.5 seconds.

Hahaha...

I'm currently driving a chipped Ibiza Cupra 1.8 20VT (207bhp) until my JCW arrives and I can tell you for certain that it won't do 0-60 in 5.5 Secs. The standard(156bhp) 0-60 for the car is 7.8. I've done a few runs and I've managed to get it down to late 6s, early 7s, depending on conditions...

Bezza

 

[dgszweda]

The 0-60 time of the JCW 210bhp should be roughly around 6.4sec. But like everyone said above, there are better measurements. 5-60mph is a much better test. It weeds out what I call fake 0-60 times from high hp, 4WD cars. Sure they meet those numbers, but they pound the heck out of the car, and the reason they get that low is that they have an advantage going from 0-5mph than a two wheel drive car. Bringing the car to 6000 rpm in an EVO VIII and then dumping the clutch isn't real world numbers. When you look at the 5-60mph numbers, the EVO VIII is just a tad bit quicker than a JCW.

 

[GTT 280]

The 0-60 time of the JCW 210bhp should be roughly around 6.4sec. But like everyone said above, there are better measurements. 5-60mph is a much better test. It weeds out what I call fake 0-60 times from high hp, 4WD cars. Sure they meet those numbers, but they pound the heck out of the car, and the reason they get that low is that they have an advantage going from 0-5mph than a two wheel drive car. Bringing the car to 6000 rpm in an EVO VIII and then dumping the clutch isn't real world numbers. When you look at the 5-60mph numbers, the EVO VIII is just a tad bit quicker than a JCW.

Wait a minute - you are saying that a MCS JCW is nearly as fast as an EVO8 ????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

Have you read any magazines lately ?????

Do you have any actual 5-60 times for EVO's and JCW and the source of those figures ?

 

[Paul]

These are from JCW & BMW and are also in the news section on MINI2:

Power: 210bhp (154kW) @ 6950rpm

• Max torque: 245Nm @ 4500rpm
• Top speed: 143mph (230km/h)
• 0-62mph: 6.6 seconds
• 50-75mph: 5.4 seconds (4th gear) 6.7 seconds (5th gear)
  
  
  

 

[bigbaddaboom]

As a comparison:

BMW M3 Coupe (source BMW website)

Power : 343bhp (252kW) @ 7900
Torque : 365Nm @ 4900rpm
0 - 62mph : 5.2 seconds
50 - 75mph : 5.3 seconds (4th)

Of course the M3 isn't really in it's stride until a little further up the rev range, which probably explains why the JCW and M3 are quite close in that 4th gear acceleration figure.

 

[LMB]

As a comparison:

BMW M3 Coupe (source BMW website)

Power : 343bhp (252kW) @ 7900
Torque : 365Nm @ 4900rpm
0 - 62mph : 5.2 seconds
50 - 75mph : 5.3 seconds (4th)

Of course the M3 isn't really in it's stride until a little further up the rev range, which probably explains why the JCW and M3 are quite close in that 4th gear acceleration figure.

Still impressive mind.

Hey big nice to see you around.

Have you had the upgraded yet?

 

[rentagas]

JCW have replied to my question about performance from MCSC JCW that

"I beleive the figures will almost identical to that of the hatch which is why no other figures have been published"

I wonder if this means that despite the extra weight (reflected in the 0.2s MCSC vs MCS 0-60 figures) the main determing factor in the JCW is getting the power down to the road -which would mean that the extra weight has little influence.

Or he could be making it up..........

 

[bigbaddaboom]

Not yet LMB but I've got the test drive in a few weeks....Chris Dawson mentioned something about: "If you like it then we can do it that day for you!"

better not tell the wife...

 

[BigM]

I haven't got the upgrade yet, in fact will probably go for the Dinan instead. One point, what do you find is the best shifting/rpm pattern for the quickest 0-60 time. For instance do you shift at 4000 or so rpm 1-3 or for instance I find that the car "feels" quicker if I launch at 4000 and run to about 6500 then shift to 2nd and run that all the way to 60 +. Any input?

 

[dgszweda]

Wait a minute - you are saying that a MCS JCW is nearly as fast as an EVO8 ????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

Have you read any magazines lately ?????

Do you have any actual 5-60 times for EVO's and JCW and the source of those figures ?

Fast is a relative term. What does fast really mean? Acceleration, top speed... The reason the EVO VIII and the STi get great 0-60 times, is solely because of their 4WD. There are a lot of cars with more hp that cannot beat the EVO VIII from a standstill. This is because the major benefit to decreasing 0-60 times is traction. The more traction you have, the hard you can accelerate off the line. With 4WD, the traction is miles ahead of our Mini's FWD. The numbers I have seen for an EVO VIII 5-60 has been in the 6.8 to 7 second range. The numbers I have seen for a JCW is in the 7.2 second range for 5-60. Again, it isn't as fast, but just goes to show that low 0-60 numbers from a 4WD car does not necessarily make it any faster. An EVO only has 271hp. At the wheels many people have seen in the 230-240hp range. A lot of people have seen in the 180hp range for a JCW mini. Add the extra 10hp upgrade, and I would assume that people will see in the upper 180, if not touch the 190hp. This is only about a 45hp gap. Add the weight of the EVO and it lowers the difference. And then finally add the fact that the power for the EVO comes much later on in the powerband than it does the Mini, and you can't start seeing why the rolling acceleration to 60 is less advantageous to the EVO VIII. Since the rolling speed is much more closer to real world driving, it is more indicative of what you would see. I have seen magazines test the EVO VIII, and if you heard the engine while they were recording their 0-60 times you would cringe. Most people who value their cars would not subject it to such torture. To hear the car bouncing off of it's rev limiter while standing still is tortuous.

 

[MCBert]

I raced an Evo 7 FQ-300 last year at Santa Pod a couple of times on a RWYB day (not in the Mini, but a V8 Westfield I must add). The first time, he did a pretty standard start - 2/3000 rpm with some clutch slip. He ran about 14.2/100mph. Next run was a 6000rpm dropped clutch start - 13.4/101mph. Shows the difference the 4WD traction can make. I didn't stand a chance on the second run. It was like he'd been fired from a gun off the line.
Still a very fast car either way.