Momentary misunderstanding on my part, we're on the same page. 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 thing is though that a 250whp R53 needs to be driven hard to the redline to actually be a "250whp" car and without meth you wouldn't be able to do more than a few laps on a warm day before you had temp issues would you? 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.
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:
Another reason I selected the R56 is I thought it was cheaper to mildly mod. Intercooler, exhaust, intake, tune 200/230 HQ/TQ. What does it take to get an R53 there? I can't speak to all out numbers (I'd call that the 250+ HP range) as that's not my goal with the street car, but just curious how much $ in mods it generally takes to get an R53 to that mildly modded, still full on street car level? Are cams, head needed? I have no idea.
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.
First of all, it depends on the car. Some cars can get suprisingly close or past with a CAI and a Pulley and a good tune. A Header/exhaust OR cam should get you comfortably past that, both even moreso. That's for HP. Torque is a whole different animal; you're not going to get 230 ft/lbs at 200HP on an R53 easily, 230 is tough in an R53 without some serious modification that will correspondingly bring the HP way up. The cars are different. The R56 will pull like hell 1500 RPMs plus, but peter out on the top end (the JCW is better in this regard). The R53 will pull to redline if set up properly--mine with a BVH/Cam/Header pulls hard up to 7500 RPMs with very little drop off. The trade off in my car is down low, where you do most of your daily driving; it's relatively weak there. There are many different cams for different applications, it depends on what mods you put together, and how well they work together.
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.
It's fine around town, it's a beast on the track. You can't have it both ways, you have to compromise somewhere, I compromised on streetability. It's still "fun" on the street; I just live in a higher RPM range, which in and of itself is fun, although not a relaxing way to drive. As for cost, you could do it 4.5k (including injectors), cheaper if you get some of the list used. That will get you to 250. But there is no point in doing just that--brakes and suspension are part of an entire package, also IC, roll at, etc. so it adds up. I've always prioritized driving skills first (I'm much better than when I started, but nowhere near as good as many others, but watching lap times go down is about as much fun as you can have with your clothes on), suspension/brakes second, power third.
@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.
Currently at 6,5 but the engine shows it could rev past 7 easily. My track oriented boost curve: BHP WHP Boost and AFR:
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
I have run it to 7250 so I know it can. It's just the turbo which is out of flow at those rpm...sometime in the near future I plan for a slightly bigger turbo. This tune I have been using for nearly 3 years (2 with old engine and 1 with the new). Evolve developed it and I am really happy with it for the past 40k miles I've covered (both road and track time). It is actually a beast in track, very fun and consistent...