Head room, not as much room for added TQ/HP.
I think we are saying the same thing. countryboyshane is right on target. I said earlier that to push lots of boost you need to strengthen the bottom end.
Not to turn this into a R53 vs R56 debate but the bottom end of the R53 is stronger. Thats not taking anything away from the R56 its a MINI and I love seeing how people tune their R56 too.
Page 5 of 6
-
Yeah, I don't have a problem with the R53, nor do I care how it would react if it had a bunch of low end torque or a turbo, etc., I know it is a proven car and that's cool. R56 or R53, I always tend towards the underdog at the track.:yesnod:
-
You can fit a decat, 10-15whp gained, fit a front mount and map and add another 30whp. Add a decent intake and you've got another 5whp. Cams were fitted to a car in the uk and it picked up 10whp without any mapping.
Install meth/water injection and it cleans the engine.
A car with a hybrid was mapped yesterday and went from 156whp to 210whp. I'm no scientist but that quite a jump in performance. People have picked up 7whp from changing the coil packs.
People are only just starting to test out port and polished heads and BVHs so more potential gains there.
If you want serious power you need a fully forged engine, how many people are willing to pay for this? however a well setup 200-220whp R56 is a great car without needing to forge the engine. -
Paltry gains on the stock R56 engine, compared to what can be done on the stock R53 engine. Those are just minor modifications, with the exception of the front mount; they aren't making big power, and again, you're talking BHP not WHP. We're going to have to agree to disagree.
Water/Meth is great. You need it to keep the valves clean, another wonderful design feature of the Prince.
You may be right that there are things coming down the road for the R56, time will tell. But the truth is you can get 250HP reliably AT THE WHEELS on the R53 without touching the internals, and that could be done two years into the R53 cycle. You can't on the R56, unless something changes, and here we are at the end of the R56 cycle.
I stand by the statement that the R56 is not a mod friendly platform, and to add to that, BMW purposely made it that way. The ECU proves it (compare it to what Toyota/Subura did with the FR-S/BRZ) . The R56 has been a bane to the hardcore tuners/modders from day one. Just ask them if you don't believe me. -
I am typing whp for a reason. If I meant bhp I would have typed bhp.
-
You need to remember that the majority of people mapping R56s are just buying them and loading them into people's cars. Very few are selling their own work. -
My car has only ever been dyno'd in whp.
Edit: seen your edit, I was talking bhp before comparing factory numbers to other cars factory numbers. -
Thing is, I'm making 250 WHP for the past three years (well actually 249WHP), no meth (yet), the car is reliable and a beast on the track, on stock internals.
IMHO the R56 should be there by now in droves, but it hasn't happened yet. Hopefully it will, but it's been a chore to get there. -
The R56s might not have that top whp number like some R53s but they make up for it with all the extra torque they have and the lower down power. I've been in a 250whp R53 with meth around a track and yes it's a very quick car but it has to be driven hard to extract that power out of it, and it never threw me back in my seat like the torque on the R56 does. -
I have had no temp issues (yet), but I will do meth this year, I am concerned about it, especially long term. I'm fortunate in that ambient temps where I live are usually pretty reasonable. I've never overheated, running 30 minutes on average. Depending on the TVS, I will either go meth (leaning toward meth) or W2A, much of it depends on what I'm allowed on the track.
The R53 is never going to be a torque beast, you have to keep momentum, and the revs up, which is a hell of a lot of fun. But at 250HP in a MINI, you can hang with many, many, high priced cars, which is even more fun. On the track, I have to find an R56 faster than my car (A slightly modded JCW coupe has been the fastest R56 I've come across on the track)--not saying that there isn't one out there, but it hasn't happened yet, the extra HP has trumped the R56's torque--so far. There may come a day when high HP R56's will rule the track, but at least in the U.S. they're not here yet. -
Dave.0 Helix & RMW PoweredLifetime Supporter
In the end the R53 is a 1,000 times better to mod than the Turdblow R56 and is much more reliable than the N14.
Don't forget the R53 is much better looking. :devil: -
FWIW, this individual has a JCW turbo on an MCS:
ice_00 Chili Red Cooper S
Over PM he states he's had 37k miles on the car since the upgrade and has done 20 trackdays. -
So would you say your R53 is less streetable ("wee!!!" factor?) than the R56 with all that torque? I can see on the track, both could work out and you'd be in the upper rev range anyway.
Are you looking $5k for pulley, tune, BVH, cams, exhaust, intake? I have no bearing. -
@Bster13: Are you the same guy in the RMW forum who asked "what does it take?" ?
I think I gave you a well documented answer...didn't I?
What you are after CAN be done...whoever is telling you otherwise is just talking nonsense!
My R56 delivers more torque than a R53 engine could imagine and revs to the limiter with no power drop off. It can be done with the appropriate tuning and parts. It all depends on your budget. -
FWIW, I did some reading about the JCW development. Didn't find anything specific about the development process and having to beef up the engine, I did find a few threads talkingabout JCW vs. MCS internals and this thread kept being referenced where folks were saying the only difference between the two engines where the different pistor crowns on the JCW to lower compression:
MCS vs JCW - North American Motoring
My lazy self not going to rip about the engines myself, but I guess this is as close as I can get.
-
@Thepenl, did you replace the internals of your engine because it broke when you put the JCW turbo on it? If so, how many miles did you have on the stock internals?
Or did go into the engine because you wanted even MORE power?
As for these "track" tunes I see from you and George Talbot, are they were easier driving while on the track with power delivery or less stress on the engine when it is running in a harsh environment? -
Way back when, MINI developers in the know in England had this wonderful habit of leaking what was going on, both the good and the bad. This caused some severe reprimands, and possibly a lost job or three. But with each passing year, BMW has become more like Apple, and you can't find anything out, even off the record in PMs.
In the early years, it wasn't uncommon to get tidbits from someone working on the line or sometimes in development, either publicly or privately. It never happens now.
The numbers are good, but you can't tell what happens beyond 6500 until you run it there. How long have you had the tune and have you tracked it yet? -
The engine I had the JCW turbo put on 3 years ago worked flawlessly for 2 years without loosing a bit. I then purchased a second engine and worked everything from the start taking my time. When it was finished I swapped the engines over. This was done mainly because the Mini is my everyday car. More power is always desirable but at the time I wanted to increase the engines ability to flow more at the upper band of the revs and this was achieved via a new worked head, Motorsport valves and cams and a boost controller for creating my own boost curves. Now that's all tested to its limits I can safely change the boost vs rpm to whatever level I like and enjoy both road and track time.
Just to give you an idea here are some various boost curves the engine is capable of running with the touch of a button:
BC off:
Boost and AFR
BC off BHP
BC off WHP
Torquey one:
Boost and AFR
BHP
WHP
Page 5 of 6