2002 Mini Cooper

That's crazy Dave!!!

I have to say when I read that, even on their site, I just couldn't believe it. I spoke with one of their distributors in the US, and it is 144 HP as we know it. This is without a IT built engine, and NO dyno tuning. One question I asked was "how is this possible?" To summarize the response...the base model engines (didn't get into the S Cooper) are de-tuned for several reasons. One is for warranty reasons / longevity of the engine, a small part related to emissions, and for marketing reasons. Why buy a Mini S when a base model can make 144 hp? I then spoke with him about having a built engine (explained what that meant), removing the cat and no emissions concerns, aftermarket intake. As I would imagine, there's more to be gained.

I'm still very surprised with that type of gain from it the kit. I thought it would be a fit for ITB, but now am thinking ITA.
 
I wouldn't think that it would be a good fit in ITA at that weight. My ITA Neon weighs 2450 and has about 165hp at the flywheel.
 
... I would support the car for a year see if any are built and if they kick total but, then maybe they will need to move to A? ...
[/b]
Click to expand...
ACK.

Seriously, people - we can NOT get in the habit of thinking that we can move cars around, or handicap weights based on what we see built and raced. That's exactly the approach that brought you competition adjustments (bleah!) in our other categories.

Make the listing and weight spec on the mechanical attributes of the car. If there's a belief that ECU-controlled valve timing is going to upset the applecart (and I can see how that might well be possible), then create a factor for it, don't classify cars with that technology, or make it illegal to change those parameters in the programming.

Since the second two options are very problematic (not desirable and not practically enforceable, respectively), it may be necessary to do some serious research into the potential for electonic VVT systems to fundamentally change assumptions about IT-build power gains. We use "stock cams" and the need for manufacturers to optimize economy and driveablity with them, as a first assumption. If technology blows that up, then a re-think is required BEFORE we classifiy any cars with the technology in question.

On the other hand, if this system is strictly a VTEC-type mechanical/oil-pressure controlled system that will NOT be changed by programming, it's probably not a big issue.

K
 
And while the ITAC will take this info into consideration, there is PLENTY of optimistic claims for chips and exhaust upgrades. How are these guys calling out 144 crank hp? Are they using an engine dyno with full wiring harness and ecu? Doubt it.

These are also the two biggest opportunities for hp increases in IT.

Having said that, if it made 30% more than stock in IT trim, it would need to be 2550 in ITB. For ITA, it would be 2165ish (which is 1985 without driver - doubt it could make that).
 
Right...I doubt anyone on the ITAC wants to toss it in a class, and "See how she does", and then move it if it needs it.

The key here, and it's kinda obvious, is to nail the probable increase before it hits the track. Most cars respond to IT prep in a certain way, but others are different. Old rotaries, or cars from the early 70s, which can be saddled with some really crappy exhaust manifolds, air pumps and so on, spring to life when uncorked.

For the reasons mentioned above, this typs of car might also respond better than the standard. If so, it will be accounted for in the process.
 
That car would get murdered in ITA. Pointy-end ITA cars are putting out >175 at the crank.

~145 at the crank comes to ~125 wheel...pretty much pointy-end ITB territory...

Don't forget these are "tuner" numbers, too, developed to sell parts, not to classify cars.
 
Yeah, it would be tough to put it into A. I'd be very curious to know what the "real" numbers are at the crank. Greg, you said 145 comes to ~ 125 wheel, which would put it at the pointy end. My only issue with that is (again, assumes the HP increases are close being true to what is advertised) that's before much of an IT build. It's an aftermarket street header with a cat still on it and stock exhaust from the cat back. By all means I'm not anti-mini into ITB, although it may sound like that. At the same point the information that Dave Z. found was very interesting and can't simply be dismissed, not that the ITAC would do that.
 
A Roundel Editor just wrote in his last colum that even with camber plates, because of sturctural bracing it's limited to about -0.5 degrees. So front tires will be a weekend or even daily disposable, maybe someone's figured a work around thought.

James
 
A Roundel Editor just wrote in his last colum that even with camber plates, because of sturctural bracing it's limited to about -0.5 degrees. So front tires will be a weekend or even daily disposable, maybe someone's figured a work around thought.

James
[/b]
Click to expand...

I don't think that is entireley true on all build years of MINI. Some have a structural issue while others do not. These plates claim to give 3.5 degrees of negative camber without cutting any sheet metal:

Ireland Engineering MINI Camber Plates

Joe
 
Camber plates, upper strut mods, free strut bodies, wheel spacers. Camber won't be a problem on that car...
 
As an H Stock autocrosser very interested in taking my 03 Mini Cooper into IT, I have enjoyed this thread.

Here are some of my observations in summary:

ENGINE
1.6L, SOHC 16v (non V V T), 115hp (dynos at the wheels about 106hp). Very difficult to extract additional hp. I have seen a John Cooper Works Pkg $4,000ish (CAI, header, exhaust, reworked head, and ECU) put out about 133hp. Not sure how it was rated. Don't think the head and ECU would be IT legal. The CAI and reworked exhaust may get you only 10hp (if that). A straight pipe beyond the cat actually drops a couple hp.

SUSPENSION
With the optional suspension, the Mini handles like a dream right out of the box (much more forgiving than my 86 CRX DX). Not a lot of body roll, but coilovers would help I am sure. Its only problem is lack of camber (eats Hoosiers for lunch on the autox course). This which can be fixed with camber plates. I hear it responds very well to neg 1.5-2.0 degrees. Running on Kumho SPTs at a newly paved Heartland Park this summer, it was fairly easy on tires.

WHEELS
15x5.5 std
16x6.5 opt
I would assume 15x6 with 205/50/15 or 16x6 with 205 or 215ish tires would be IT legal?

BRAKES
It does have awesome brakes!!! ABS would have to be disabled under IT rules, I assume.

Comparing it directly to my CRX, I think ITB would be a good fit. The lack of power would be my only concern.

Paul Moylan
KCR SCCA
 
the JCW head would not pass IT rules, but the ECU might. Its a OEM ecu with a JCW chip installed. Still an OEM box which is all the rules state. But even then to really consider its potential one would have to port match, overbore .040, .5 compression bump, balence, blueprint and chiptune it with a header, exhaust and intake.
 
"one would have to port match, overbore .040, .5 compression bump, balance, blueprint and chiptune it....."

I would be very curious if that would even be worth the effort. It seems that I have heard of some front runners in ITC who run stock Honda motors. If there is power to be found, someone will find it.

Paul Moylan
KCR SCCA
Click to expand...
 
Comparing it directly to my CRX, I think ITB would be a good fit. The lack of power would be my only concern.
[/b]
Click to expand...

Welcome to ITB... <_<

No, seriously - you wanna race something with power, you should be building an AS car... been hanging out with those BMWCCA guys too much, I reckon... ;)
 
Good point about power or lack there of in ITB. Despite that, I don't think the Mini will dominate on hp courses. It's strength will be handling and braking.

As for the BMWCCA guys, I haven't hung around them much, but I do get the impression that they look at the Mini as the bastard step-child. Not a "real BMW" (imagine that!).

Thanks for letting me put in my 2 cents guys!!! I will now sit back and enjoy the debate. :lol:
 
As for the BMWCCA guys, I haven't hung around them much, but I do get the impression that they look at the Mini as the bastard step-child. Not a "real BMW" (imagine that!).
[/b]
Click to expand...

Heh heh... somehow, I think I can relate... ;)
 
Sorry I have been offline for several weeks(MAJOR house remodeling).I raced the Mini in the enduro series against John Walsh in SSC. The Mini is not VVT. I loved driving the car(specialy because it was a free ride).The car is very easy to drive the brakes are awsome but the engine is a dud. We would have to reset the ECU in the middle of races because it would detune itself. From what I hear the ECU is very hard to program. We had to do the reset with a special BMW computer. I doubt that you find any great gains in that engine. The handling was great but we would eat tires. I think the car would be a great fit in ITB because of the engine, if it had a better engine and aero it would be ITA.

Sean Christie

Former SSC Mini
Present ITA Honda Civic Si
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top