Got a private request for consideration on the 2002 Mini Cooper. 115 hp / 110 ft/lb stock. Curb weight is around 2525. Struts, FWD, short wheelbase.
2450ish in ITB...thoughts?
Printable View
Got a private request for consideration on the 2002 Mini Cooper. 115 hp / 110 ft/lb stock. Curb weight is around 2525. Struts, FWD, short wheelbase.
2450ish in ITB...thoughts?
Sounds like a sensible addition. Go for it.
K
Andy,
Those hp/tq specs are about where a Mk III Golf is.
On purely specs alone, yes. From what our information tells us, some design aspects of the Golf limit it's power potential while the Mini would get saddled with the standard 25% estimate.Quote:
Andy,
Those hp/tq specs are about where a Mk III Golf is. [/b]
Eh, hairs only split so far. I think it's great that we can get some new blood in ITB. Let's think about some of those ITA orphans, too. I know it's not terribly "SCCA" but I don't enjoy racing against short fields. With more cars in the class, if I get beat, I get beat but if I win, it actually matters.
K
How many valves per cylinder in the NA Mini? I thought it was 16 total. SOHC or DOHC? Variable valve timing? It is, after all, a BMW engine. Please be cautious here :)
BTW, a turbo version walked my hotted-up GTI VR6 pretty well at Calabogie last month. Both of us were on comparable street tires, and he had me in the braking zones and corners while I only had him on the longest straight, FWIW.
It is a 1.6 liter 16v. At first blush it could be a fit. Obviously would need some informed input on the capabilities of the motor/chassis.
As with any newer car I would expect outstanding brakes. That would probably worry me most.
SOHC. Standard specs are in the GCR in the SS section. Big brakes.
As far as it being a BMW engine, the only ones I have seen that pick up big gains are the inline 6's...and that isn't limited to BMW. The Datsun and Toyota variants are extremely powerful and have huge potential. It's just a good base design.
As long as it's not VVT (unlikely with SOHC but still possible, especially since 16V), I'd say go with it. If VVT, though, frankly I'd be too confused to classify it unless the VVT was specified as disabled.Quote:
SOHC.
[/b]
Edit: VVT=Variable Valve Timing
It's not actually a BMW engine, it's a Tritec engine (joint venture between Chrysler and Rover.) The engine was developed by Chrysler and is based on the Neon engine.
Good info. I didn't know that. Any idea on VVT or not?Quote:
It's not actually a BMW engine, it's a Tritec engine (joint venture between Chrysler and Rover.) The engine was developed by Chrysler and is based on the Neon engine.
[/b]
Edit:
DANGER Will Robinson, it IS a variable valve timing engine. "Valve lift and opening times are masterminded by infinite electronic control adjusting to the driver’s needs for power and performance. This highly efficient valve management combines superior fuel economy, a high standard of motoring culture, spontaneous response and optimised emission management, thus offering a new combination of qualities never seen before." Mini Official Press Release
Sorry, I don't know.Quote:
Good info. I didn't know that. Any idea on VVT or not?[/b]
EDIT: just saw your edited post, so now I know!
Actually, I still don't know. That press release is for the upcoming second-generation Mini. I suspect the first-generation one didn't have VVT, but as I said before, I don't really know.Quote:
Good info. I didn't know that. Any idea on VVT or not?
DANGER Will Robinson, it IS a variable valve timing engine. "Valve lift and opening times are masterminded by infinite electronic control adjusting to the driver’s needs for power and performance. This highly efficient valve management combines superior fuel economy, a high standard of motoring culture, spontaneous response and optimised emission management, thus offering a new combination of qualities never seen before." Mini Official Press Release
[/b]
You're right. It seems to have a redesigned 120hp "Prince" engine instead of the 116hp "Tritec". Still not sure about VVT for the Tritec. It might not, but I don't have enough info.Quote:
Actually, I still don't know. That press release is for the upcoming second-generation Mini. I suspect the first-generation one didn't have VVT, but as I said before, I don't really know.
[/b]
Edit: BTW, I think it's interesting and possibly important that the only difference between the 90hp 1.6L Tritec in the Europe-only MINI One and the 116hp 1.6L Tritec in the MINI Cooper is ONLY the ECU! That makes me think VVT, but I guess it could be something else. "In some markets, such as Australia and the US, only the MINI Cooper and Cooper S are sold because the MINI One's engine was considered to deliver insufficient power to run an air conditioner - a necessary feature in those climates. However, the only difference between the engines in the 'One' and the 'Cooper' models is a software change within the engine control unit which is tuned for optimum fuel economy on the MINI One and for a compromise between power and economy on the Cooper." Wikipedia MINI link. See also Josh's hyperlink to the Tritec 1.6L, as above.
It is a 1.6 SOHC with 16 valves. No VVT. It was also used by Chrysler in Europe in the PT Cruiser. It looks just like a small Neon engine with a timming chain instead od belt.
Thought the Forbes review of the Mini was interesting. Here's a segment of it:
"We knew the price since BMW announced it in January. (Yes, that's right, BMW, which has owned the Mini brand since 2000.) We also knew that some in the automotive press have trashed the Mini for being gratuitously nostalgic. But, after having driven it, what we didn't know was that the Mini Cooper is in reality a heavily camouflaged BMW 3-Series on a smaller frame that sells for little more than half the dough."
You're right Andy - big brakes! 276 front; 239 rear according to the GCR.
I'd like to see the car go into ITB, but not at that weight. (Again, assuming it's not a VVT as that would change things a bit.) I'll be interested in saying what one of the Mini performance shops I know has to say about it.
how could a FWD car be considered a camouflaged 3 series ???? Sounds like journalistic license. I'm sure the BMW chassis engineers did their best, but when I rented a mini cooper and took it to Infineon when I was a guest instructor for the BMW club, it didn't feel as confidence inspiring as even my e30.
cheers,
bruce
Quote:
Thought the Forbes review of the Mini was interesting. Here's a segment of it:
"We knew the price since BMW announced it in January. (Yes, that's right, BMW, which has owned the Mini brand since 2000.) We also knew that some in the automotive press have trashed the Mini for being gratuitously nostalgic. But, after having driven it, what we didn't know was that the Mini Cooper is in reality a heavily camouflaged BMW 3-Series on a smaller frame that sells for little more than half the dough."
You're right Andy - big brakes! 276 front; 239 rear according to the GCR.
I'd like to see the car go into ITB, but not at that weight. (Again, assuming it's not a VVT as that would change things a bit.) I'll be interested in saying what one of the Mini performance shops I know has to say about it.
[/b]
Good question. The rear suspension looks fully independent. The above-cited Mini Official Press Release called the front suspension MacPherson (mis-spelled as "McPherson" in the reference), but I don't think that would be correct if it has any kind of upper A-arm or other BMW-style links to improve the camber-change curve. Does anyone know if it's just a simple MacStrut or whether it has a modern front suspension that just looks like a MacStrut?Quote:
how could a FWD car be considered a camouflaged 3 series ???? Sounds like journalistic license. I'm sure the BMW chassis engineers did their best, but when I rented a mini cooper and took it to Infineon when I was a guest instructor for the BMW club, it didn't feel as confidence inspiring as even my e30.
cheers,
bruce
[/b]
Edit: Weren't some of the 3-series AWD?
I just checked the BMW parts book, and it from there it looks like a simple Macstrut (but not the same as a 3-series).Quote:
Good question. The rear suspension looks fully independent. The above-cited Mini Official Press Release called the front suspension "McPherson" (mis-spelled in original), but I don't think that would be correct if it has any kind of upper A-arm or other BMW-style links to improve the camber-change curve. Does anyone know if it's just a simple MacStrut or whether it has a modern front suspension that just looks like a MacStrut?
Edit: Weren't some of the 3-series AWD?
[/b]
While I would certainly be worried seeing one show up at the track, I do think that the Mini would be a great direction for ITB by bringing in new blood... It may even score new people with "less money" just because they would be proud racing against the Mini (basically it would bring the whole class status up a notch), rather than a bunch of (no offence) old vw's and honda's. - Seriosly NO OFFENCE, I have no better, and I am one of those that would enjoy saying that we race against cars such as the mini.
Raymond "I still think despite the changes in ITA that ITB is the best class with the most "car" options for "winners" Blethen
This is a simple FWD McStrut car. It has no heritage with the 3-series BMW. The camber curve is non-existant. Check with the GS and HS guys who run these in Solo. They burn up a set of tires in no-time-flat because the cars are ultra camber-challenged.
It's a 115hp car that fits in ITB at 2450 no problem. No? It would be a nimble little devil but outclassed on the bigger stuff I bet.
Quote:
It is, after all, a BMW engine. Please be cautious here :)
[/b]
You gotta love this! B)
Quote:
I know it's not terribly "SCCA" but I don't enjoy racing against short fields. With more cars in the class, if I get beat, I get beat but if I win, it actually matters.
K
[/b]
WHAT!?!?! That's blasphemy! I love the way you think though. :D
Oh-yeah, and the M-44 BMW's are just tearing/cleaning up in ITA too :dead_horse: . I'm really curious exactly how short Rob's going to be when he completes his build up. Do I hear 2500lbs for the Z3 and the others moved down to ITB because no more weight can be found to remove? :lol:Quote:
You gotta love this! B)
[/b]
Class the Mini, I know one that's going to be running USTCC. Just call Kevin MacDonald when you do because he can really set you up suspender wise. Who else here is running $10k/set coilovers?
James
Andy ...Quote:
Got a private request for consideration on the 2002 Mini Cooper. 115 hp / 110 ft/lb stock. Curb weight is around 2525. Struts, FWD, short wheelbase.
2450ish in ITB...thoughts?
[/b]
Why +150# to curb weight in ITB?!?! I was thinking about asking for it a while back in A at ~100# or so more then the CRX. That car seems like the modern day CRX. Is the CRX moving to B? :D
You think this car can make 130whp? 35% more than stock? That is what it would have make to be the 'equal' of the CRX - not to mention the CRX's double wishbone advantage. HUGE.Quote:
Andy ...
Why +150# to curb weight in ITB?!?! I was thinking about asking for it a while back in A at ~100# or so more then the CRX. That car seems like the modern day CRX. Is the CRX moving to B? :D [/b]
2525 is the curb weight. 2450 would likely be the race weight. That is 2270 plus driver. You ok? :D
I would welcome the MINI into B.
Here are a couple of links. People with a lot more technical knowledge than I have might give them a call to discuss what these cars are capable of:
A MINI race series
http://www.minidriving.com/page.asp?PageID=7
A MINI head builder's flow numbers (watch out for the oversize valves)
http://www.chrracingproducts.com/CFMnumbers.html
Additionally there are a few prod MINI's out there. They must have some knowledge we can learn from.
Dave Z
Are they able to do everything to modify camber as allowed in IT trim? In SSC the car is classed at 2,655 and from what I hear does o.k. with tires / handling. I still think 2,450 is a tad bit lite.Quote:
They burn up a set of tires in no-time-flat because the cars are ultra camber-challenged.[/b]
It'd be nice to see some new blood, I'm with Ray... but I'd have to let others more technically astute than I provide direction on weight...
i think the Mini is a great car for ITB and fits the class "character" perfectly. i wouldn't expect it to improve much more or less than any other car in IT trim. i assume it comes out of the process at 2450? considering all the recent changes to weights and classes in IT, if the formula spits out 2450, i'd probably trust it, as it seems to work pretty well.
Why is that light Dave? Your Prelude has 5 less horsepower, more torque and a better suspension design IIRC.Quote:
Are they able to do everything to modify camber as allowed in IT trim? In SSC the car is classed at 2,655 and from what I hear does o.k. with tires / handling. I still think 2,450 is a tad bit lite.
[/b]
They are not able to do ANYTHING to change camber except stock alignment. But since it's a McStrut car, 'camber' curve is almost a non-starter.
Amen. They do a lot of things well, especially the 'STOP' thing. Ran against them in Showroom Stock for a bunch of years (Gerry ? Sean ? You're out there somewhere...time to chime in) and they're potent little buggers.Quote:
Big brakes.
[/b]
In SS, they had limited choice of tires and some continuing issues with half-shafts, but with a little development, it's probably a front-runner in B.
Look at some old SSC lap times for the NA Minis before picking a weight. Too light and you'll piss of a bunch of other ITB guys.
Since when? :rolleyes:Quote:
They are not able to do ANYTHING to change camber except stock alignment.[/b]
I was comparing it to the ITB class, not to just my Prelude. If you weren't looking for input, why bother to ask?
Track records were set this year at LRP and NHIS:Quote:
Look at some old SSC lap times for the NA Minis before picking a weight. Too light and you'll piss of a bunch of other ITB guys.
[/b]
NHIS: 1:19.6 (ITB track record in the high 1:17's ?)
LRP: 1:04.9 (ITB track record in the high 1:03's)
Any other data? The process is the process. We have to put it through and see what happens. On paper, it will be very close - and that is the goal.
"Track records were set this year at LRP and NHIS:
NHIS: 1:19.6 (ITB track record in the high 1:17's ?)
LRP: 1:04.9 (ITB track record in the high 1:03's)"
I set both of those track records in a 2005 MINI Cooper S (Supercharged). In both cases I destroyed the fron tires. In SSC it is not possible to run these lap times for an entire race. I also had a 2002 MINI (non supercharged) at LRP the best I could manage was a 1:05.6 - in a draft. Again for me to do this I destroyed the left front tire and it was not a pace that could be kept for the entire race. My normal pace in the 2002 MINI was mid to low 1:06's.
At LRP in the 2002 MINI I was absolutley flat around the entire track with the exception for Big Bend and a small lift in the left hander. I do not know how much faster you can go in ITB, but I would be surprised to see a 2002 MINI in the high 1:03's even with camber and the usual IT car preparation. Remember a big part of the 2002 MINI was its brakes and ABS - If I remember correctly there is no ABS in ITB. FYI I could not keep up with the Neons in a straight line they were much faster then me.
Fred
Thanks Mr. P. ! So with 50 less hp, the NA Mini wouldn't be touching these times. Come on guys!!!!Quote:
"Track records were set this year at LRP and NHIS:
NHIS: 1:19.6 (ITB track record in the high 1:17's ?)
LRP: 1:04.9 (ITB track record in the high 1:03's)"
I set both of those track records in a 2005 MINI Cooper S (Supercharged). In both cases I destroyed the fron tires. In SSC it is not possible to run these lap times for an entire race. I also had a 2002 MINI (non supercharged) at LRP the best I could manage was a 1:05.6 - in a draft. Again for me to do this I destroyed the left front tire and it was not a pace that could be kept for the entire race. My normal pace in the 2002 MINI was mid to low 1:06's.
At LRP in the 2002 MINI I was absolutley flat around the entire track with the exception for Big Bend and a small lift in the left hander. I do not know how much faster you can go in ITB, but I would be surprised to see a 2002 MINI in the high 1:03's even with camber and the usual IT car preparation. Remember a big part of the 2002 MINI was its brakes and ABS - If I remember correctly there is no ABS in ITB. FYI I could not keep up with the Neons in a straight line they were much faster then me.
Fred
[/b]
Since I thought you were asking about Showroom stock rules. No camber plates in SS.Quote:
Since when? :rolleyes:
I was comparing it to the ITB class, not to just my Prelude. If you weren't looking for input, why bother to ask? [/b]
I am looking for input - but you say that 2450 is too light - based on what? I put your specs out there to compare...since your car is at 2450 as well. When you say it's too light, it would be nice to hear some reasoning....
The Solo cars and the SS cars eat tires alive.
Doh never mind, that was a cooper S.
I made the same mistake James...48 more hp than the standard Mini and it's still 2 seconds off ITB. I think the 115hp and no ABS, McStruts and FWD make a nice fit in ITB. No?Quote:
Doh never mind, that was a cooper S. [/b]
Write your letters if you think it should/shoudn't...throw some reasons in there for fun!
All the numbers do add up huh.
This is why I love the fact that we have a process of sorts. I am sure that it includes inputs for brake sizes, chassis type, drive wheels, engine size, head type, etc. Run it through that process and let it run at the weight that process spits out.
If there is something seriously wrong with the result, there is a mechanism to fix that.
They would be fun to race with. Of course more fun if I can beat them, but that is more up to me than to them :P .
I think it'd be a great fit for ITB. I used to own an 05 Cooper S and have driven the standard Cooper. It's a great chassis but the base model engine is a dog, imo. It's not revvy, it's not torquey, it's just "there". How it will stand up to the VW's and Honda's is anyone's guess but I'm betting it will be a good match-up. The aero on the Mini is pretty atrocious, there's no camber curve, and I don't think there's a ton of power to get out of the engine. What it does have is room for big tires and good brakes. It'd probably make a good enduro car...