MINI Cooper Forum banner
1 - 20 of 28 Posts

·
Clio 197 R27
Joined
·
2,235 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Did anyone see Top Gear lastnight?

I found it hard to believe that a new Golf Gti could post a quicker time around the circuit than an MCS Works :confused:

If i remember rightly the Golf has 200bhp, with a 0 - 60 time of 6.9 seconds, and surely not the handling to match a cooper s. Whereas the new works s has 210bhp, with a 0-60 time of around 6.5! It just doesnt seem right that an S Works could get beaten by a golf!

Am I missing something :confused:
 

·
Track addict
Joined
·
5,960 Posts
nickbardsley said:
Did anyone see Top Gear lastnight?

I found it hard to believe that a new Golf Gti could post a quicker time around the circuit than an MCS Works :confused:

If i remember rightly the Golf has 200bhp, with a 0 - 60 time of 6.9 seconds, and surely not the handling to match a cooper s. Whereas the new works s has 210bhp, with a 0-60 time of around 6.5! It just doesnt seem right that an S Works could get beaten by a golf!

Am I missing something :confused:

Yes you are Nick.

The ability to get around a track quickly has nothing to do with 0-60 times, and little to do with top end. Its about how quickly you can get around corners - and thats where the standard JCW falls flat on its face - because of runflat tyres. Every car with runflats has sufferred on the Top Gear tests this year - including the BMW Z4.

One thing they ignored completely was the fact that the Golf, altough quick, was virtually falling off the track at every corner - I can't believe they were happy to say the car was faster when on most cuircuits it would have hit something hard. Thanks goodness they use an airfield!! You couln't drive the Golf on public roads anywhere near its limits as you would just hit oncoming traffic etc.

It was a dissapointing result for the JCWS, and I reckon its all down to the tyres. Other cars with similar or even worse power to weight ration got around the track quicker. This shouldn't happen.

I bet you no one on this whole board thats changed from runflats to proper tyres has ever decided its the wrong choice performance wise. Perhaps when you get a puncture its the wrong choice, but other than that, runflats suck.
 

·
Clio 197 R27
Joined
·
2,235 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
Yeah I agree with what you are saying Tony, I was only mentioning 0-60 times as a benchmark of the performance of the cars... I know this is not a true indication of the cars performance.

The golf looked to understeer quite a lot through most of the bends, I run non runflats on my car but i didnt realise how bad the runflats were... I ditched them before I even drove the car.

Would be interesting to see what difference it would make to the times had the mini been fitted with non runflats
 

·
Track addict
Joined
·
5,960 Posts
nickbardsley said:
Yeah I agree with what you are saying Tony, I was only mentioning 0-60 times as a benchmark of the performance of the cars... I know this is not a true indication of the cars performance.

The golf looked to understeer quite a lot through most of the bends, I run non runflats on my car but i didnt realise how bad the runflats were... I ditched them before I even drove the car.

Would be interesting to see what difference it would make to the times had the mini been fitted with non runflats

Top Gear I'm sure have talked about this before - sure they said a good driver would see2-3 seconds a lap for non runflats..... they really should mention this during the testing. I was also intrigued as to why they didn't test the current true hatch champion, the excellent new clio 182 sport.
 

·
Clio 197 R27
Joined
·
2,235 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
I seem to recall that 5th gear once tried different tyres on a clio 172 and took it round one of the circuits at Bedford Autodrome to demonstrate the differences in lap times. Shame Mini fit runflats as standard :(
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
139 Posts
I just wish that we had the option to watch (or ditch) Top Gear over here in USA. My parents still live in the UK and it's standard watching when I go to visit.

PS - They have it as an option to suggest on the BBC America website. Maybe if enough of us request it.................
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
425 Posts
That being said not many of us are going to race a gti round a track! 'Car' magazine recently (last month I think) tested the Works, new Golf GTI, Renaultsport Megane 225 and Civic Type R together in a road test, and the result was the Works was the car that everyone wanted to drive home at the end! In the real world I think we all know which is the better car! :p :D
 

·
///M Power
Joined
·
5,066 Posts
adamlondon said:
That being said not many of us are going to race a gti round a track! 'Car' magazine recently (last month I think) tested the Works, new Golf GTI, Renaultsport Megane 225 and Civic Type R together in a road test, and the result was the Works was the car that everyone wanted to drive home at the end! In the real world I think we all know which is the better car! :p :D
Exactly... Hot hatches are not track toys... they're fun cars for twisty roads... I think CAR magazine got it right! :D

But all that said... It's the character of the car that draws me to it, and 2 seconds around a track means nothing to me!!... none of the other cars on there can match the mini for uniqueness.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,329 Posts
Tony*t3 said:
One thing they ignored completely was the fact that the Golf, altough quick, was virtually falling off the track at every corner - I can't believe they were happy to say the car was faster when on most cuircuits it would have hit something hard. Thanks goodness they use an airfield!! You couln't drive the Golf on public roads anywhere near its limits as you would just hit oncoming traffic etc.
How can you say that, have you driven one?

If you watch the Stig testing a lot of cars he will clip the sides, we didn't get to see the MINI or the other cars sadly this time.

I have a pretty standard standard Golf mkV and don't think it handles noticable worse than a MINI, if anything the roadholding in the wet is better and the ESP stability program is amazing - no doubt this was switched off during the lap.

I am surpised though that the MINI was behind the Golf and even the honda. The big 18" wheels and runflat tyres would definitely not help.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,319 Posts
Watched the programme myself aswell, have heard the megane225 described as a normal hatchback that just has a bit more power other than this its a bit of a poor attempt, the new Golf GTi seems to be a big improvement on the lardy attempts of the Mk3 and 4 and they do seem to have done a great job with it - not sure if its particulary ground breaking and cant see many of the Golfs doing track days if they do they need to sort out that handling or there will be many a mk5 gti in the gravel trap :D - well it didnt look good but who knows? .
As already said the MCS Works 210 won a recent test in Car, think the runflats do make quite a big differnce - I know which car id rather be in any day and it aint the Golf theyve bored the pants off me for some years now, Mk1 Gti (ground breaking) Mk2 GTi 16v a cracker, mk3 VR6 fast Mk3 gti forget it Mk4 bland lardy - still reliable but as many a motoring journalist has said doesnt deserve the Gti badge would rather have the 150pd.

I can see the Mk6 Golf being a Green Army Tank or of simular weight comparisson, they'll probably stick a 15litre 1800bhp engine in it :D - a far cry from the original. For me the new Golf is an improvement but behind the Mini in my desirability stakes, would rather stick with my S. :D
 

·
MotorCityMadman
Joined
·
3,793 Posts
I can't see how Top Gear would test a JCW with runflats to begin with. They know the JCW is the enthusiasts' choice and that the runflats would probably be ditched before 50 miles had been driven. So why test the vehicle with something that is probably not on 95% of them in the real world or definitely not on them on the track?! :confused:

Is it because they are just sticking to what comes OEM?! I don't get this.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,329 Posts
Cooper76 said:
I can't see how Top Gear would test a JCW with runflats to begin with. They know the JCW is the enthusiasts' choice and that the runflats would probably be ditched before 50 miles had been driven. So why test the vehicle with something that is probably not on 95% of them in the real world or definitely not on them on the track?! :confused:

Is it because they are just sticking to what comes OEM?! I don't get this.
They should IMO be testing cars as they come out the factory (works S is a special case though) as if they start comparing modded cars it would never be a level playing field.

The MINI is only available with runflats so that is how it should be tested, no?
 

·
Track addict
Joined
·
5,960 Posts
Cooper76 said:
I can't see how Top Gear would test a JCW with runflats to begin with. They know the JCW is the enthusiasts' choice and that the runflats would probably be ditched before 50 miles had been driven. So why test the vehicle with something that is probably not on 95% of them in the real world or definitely not on them on the track?! :confused:

Is it because they are just sticking to what comes OEM?! I don't get this.


The essence of their tests is that they stick to OEM - otherwise there would be no true baseline.
 

·
MotorCityMadman
Joined
·
3,793 Posts
KenL said:
They should IMO be testing cars as they come out the factory (works S is a special case though) as if they start comparing modded cars it would never be a level playing field.

The MINI is only available with runflats so that is how it should be tested, no?
Right, but the JCW and Golf GTI are definitely special enthusiast cars that will not be ordered by the majority of those who order the Cooper or Golf, as they will stick with more basic models. Therefore, it is not unlikely to think that the crap runflats would be ditched for stickies. You could give the JCW and Golf the same tires and then let 'em rip on the track to make that variable even. Therefore, any differences cannot be blamed on the tires, but on the vehicle. That is, after all, what they are testing right?!
 

·
...where´s the any-key?
Joined
·
23,182 Posts
Tony*t3 said:
The essence of their tests is that they stick to OEM - otherwise there would be no true baseline.
If that's the case that car should have had 16" X-lites on, not huge clunky JCW Wheels. As much as I love my 18" wheels, they don't handle as well as 16".
 

·
Track addict
Joined
·
5,960 Posts
KenL said:
How can you say that, have you driven one?

If you watch the Stig testing a lot of cars he will clip the sides, we didn't get to see the MINI or the other cars sadly this time.

QUOTE]


I don't need to drive one, I used my eyes whilst I watched the program. The Golf took lines wider than any other test that I have seen Top Gear run, it almost left the track three times, and those corners it did negociate it had one wheel up in the air.

In fact, it took such poor lines I thought the blind guy was being allowed to drive it, not the stig.

Its like this. If Topgear decide they like a car, they gloss over the short cominings. If they decide they dont like a car, they highlight the shortcommings and that all you hear. You couldn't have Jeremey record his piece where he says he absolutly loves the new Golf and everyone should have one, and then highlight the act that the stig almost crashed it three times during his hot lap.... could you. That would make Jeremy look a right tit.
 

·
Track addict
Joined
·
5,960 Posts
LMB said:
If that's the case that car should have had 16" X-lites on, not huge clunky JCW Wheels. As much as I love my 18" wheels, they don't handle as well as 16".

i never mentioned the alloys, just the runflats. And the 17" S lites are OEM anyway - so it could equally have had those on.

One things is definate, it would have had runflats, whatever the size.
 
1 - 20 of 28 Posts
Top