Sections: JCW | R56 (Coupe) Aug 8th, 2006 42 Comments 
GP owners breath easy. A vague mention combined with mis-read press release means that the comparison made between the GP and the new MCS isn’t correct. The GP is 14 seconds faster than the stock JCW while the R56 is 15 seconds faster than the stock MCS. Of course this could still mean the R56 MCS is almost as fast as the current JCW MCS, however we don’t have those numbers so we can’t compare.
Recently I read a little fact in the London Motorshow MINI press packet about the JCW GP that seemed rather impressive. According to BMW the GP is a full 14 seconds faster than the stock R53 MCS 200bhp JCW MCS around the famed NÒ¼rburgring Nordschleife. Without question something for MINI/BMW engineers to be proud of. However there was another recent mention of Nurburgring lap times, this one coming from a Fifth Gear review of the R56 MCS Prototype. They mentioned that the new 2007 MCS is said to be at least a full 15 seconds faster than the previous R53 Cooper S. If all these numbers are correct (and coming from BMW, they should be) that would make the stock 2007 MCS a second faster than the limited edition JCW GP around the NÒ¼rburgring Nordschleife.
No the 2007 MCS isn’t faster than the GP. But it will on doubt be fast. With a broad torque range (177ft lbs coming on at 1400 rpm, the R56 will be a screamer. And with less weight in key places (and overall) it will be phenomenal in the corners as well.
Lucas Aug 8th, 2006 Link
I don’t suppose the new MCS will have better tires than the GP? From the press release it doesn’t seem like the new MCS will be any lighter than the out going model. Perhaps better traction/brakes/tires enables it to be faster, but still, it doesn’t make a whole lot of sense that 2 cars with similar weight/suspension setup and a 40 hp difference will have such similar lap times.
From the press release it doesn’t seem like the new MCS will be any lighter than the out going model.
There was no mention of vehicle weight in the official press release other than listing several major components that are lighter.
drew Aug 8th, 2006 Link
oh man gabe, way to stir the pot!
i would guess it has to be weight reduction and engine management – nothing else that could produce such results…
Ian C. Aug 8th, 2006 Link
Of course, it could also be that there are errors in the information – we’ve seen that before – indeed there is definitely a weight error for the ‘07, either from Gabes secret source, or from the official Europe pre-press-release presentation …
Ian – keep in mind there was never an official reference to weight of the car. Just some comments made by MINI “handlers” at the event. A very important thing to remember :)
MINIAK Aug 8th, 2006 Link
Tires as mentioned above could be a factor. The R56 is engineered to use the run-flats better. Does the GP have runflats?
Things that could be a factor even in two identical cars: (not all-inclusive)
1) Tires can make a HUGE difference – even just tire pressures. 2) Weather – cooler air can increase perfomance of the engine and potentially tire grip. 3) Driver – can make a BIG difference 4) Traffic – Lap traffic can slow you down – were these clean laps? 5) Track weight – assuming neither had a passenger and half a tank of gas.
There are others I am sure, but this is what I could think of immediately.
Signed a.k.a SpoilSport :-)
Chris Kimmelshue Aug 8th, 2006 Link
There are too many variables to do anything other than speculate. The lap time difference could come from a number of factors, not including the bhp difference:
*tire compound *track conditions (traffic, weather, surface) *different test driver *better brakes (larger swept area, pad compound, etc) *better power delivery (ecu calibration, throttle response) *lighter weight *higher top speed (for those long N-Ring straights) *gearing *suspension (different pickup points, spring rates, etc) *better aerodynamics
The difference is quite dramatic between the R53 and R56 though.
cct1 Aug 8th, 2006 Link
Only way to know for sure is have the same driver take each around. I’d wager the GP would win…
I read recently where a famous professional driver took a Cayman around the Nurburgring and did it eleven seconds faster than another professional driver did it in a Carrera…
As mentioned above, there is a high amount of variability here, and I’m not so sure a track as long as the Nurburgring is inherently accurate. It would be in BMW’s best interest for the new MCS to be that much better than the old one, so although I’m not doubting that the new MCS is faster, I don’t know if you take much stock in it being 15 seconds faster.
Tim Aug 8th, 2006 Link
We know one thing for sure. The GP will be the fastest production Thunder Blue MINI ever produced!!!!!
Craig Aug 8th, 2006 Link
Top Gear should have “The Stig” drive both the GP and the R56 then would truly know the difference.
Jon Aug 8th, 2006 Link
It wouldn’t be to suprising if the R56 is quicker, afterall I know that I would assume a redesign would make strong grains on the previous model. As cool as the GP’s are they are based on the current platform.
The GP is at the top of the food chain for our current model but I fully expect it to remain potent but not at the top of the next generation. I would like to think that the owners of the GP bought their cars with more than just lap times in mind, but rather they bought cars that are the best of the best at the current time.
Frank Aug 8th, 2006 Link
Gee, I would expect the R56 MCS to be better performance wise than the current car, not equal or lesser.
Having said that, these differences measured in seconds, may or may not be all that noticeable out there in the real world, where 99% of MINIs will spend their useful lives. I see these statistics being important to folks that plan to track/race the cars aside from the daily commuter routine.
Judgement is still out on the R56. There is no doubt in my mind this car is intriguing and will bring some surprises up its sleeves, because the ’07s better be better than the ‘02-’06 MK1 generation if MINI is to continue its success with these cars.
I hope the PSA engine will prove to be a reliable workhorse from the get go, as much as the TRITEC has been for the R50 MINI since its introduction in 2001.
tony T Aug 8th, 2006 Link
Gabe, On a track, the ‘thickness’ of the powerband is irrelevant – Your not trying unless the car is constantly over at least 5500 revs.
I would suspect the original times of the ’standard’ R53 being only 14 seconds slower than a GP are probably completly wrong. The GP with 218bhp and seriously uprated suspension and brakes, weight loss, aerodynamics, etc should easily outperform a completly standard car by significantly more than 14 seconds….
I would expect that the GP (if all the hype is to be in anyway believed) would be at least 8-10 seconds faster than a ‘Standard’ 210bhp JCW….
Either that, or the hype about the GP is just that. Hype. Which I dont think it is, judging by the reports.
tony T Aug 8th, 2006 Link
Just to clarify, my above comment was based on the Nurburgring, not other tracks. I cant think of any corner where, trying to set a decent lap time, you’d be using such low down torque out of any corner, even carousel…. if you were below 4000 rpm, you’d be in the wrong gear.
Matt M Aug 8th, 2006 Link
Bleh, all you people that bought a GP are just mad cuz the R56 will be faster. Don’t worry, we are all still jealous of you, and I’m sure if you can afford a GP, you will be able to buy an R56 in a year or two.
Kennedy Aug 8th, 2006 Link
Maybe they meant 15 seconds faster than the R53 (in reverse)… any small print or astericks next to that? :)
eto Aug 8th, 2006 Link
I’m just impressed that MINI may have developed a car that will outperform the previous generation dramatically. We’ll have to wait a few months to see if the information Gabe has provided is true (although I have faith). I have seen many small cars over the past few years get more and more bloated to meet safety standards, and the engines have had to grow to meet the heavier weight. MINI appears to have bucked the trend and designed a second generation car that increased power, increased efficiency, (possibly) increased performance, and (possibly) decreased weight.
I have doubts about the R56 S outperforming the GP, but if all the pre-release rumors prove to be correct, MINI (and BMW) should be applauded for proving that a small car doesn’t have to get bigger to be better; minor length increases aside. ;)
Jake Aug 8th, 2006 Link
Gabe, you’re working everyone up into a tizzy with this one!
Nurburgring is a very long track and as mentioned above, many factors can affect a lap time. I just love the clip that Top Gear did on the Jag Type S on that track: http://www.topgear.com/content/timetoburn/sections/videos/
Never a dull moment at MotoringFile! Well done.
Jake
Diego Lopez Aug 8th, 2006 Link
Gabe,
Correct me if I’m wrong but I thought I had read that the GP was 14 sec’s quicker than the JCW around the ‘Ring.
“Comparison tests on the race track prove that the new model offers even better performance than the already outstanding MINI Cooper S with the John Cooper Works Tuning Kit: The MINI Cooper S with the John Cooper Works GP Kit laps the Nordschleife of NÒ¼rburgring — without the Grand Prix circuit — in 8 : 41.55 minutes, almost 14 seconds faster than the production model.”
Whew – that makes a helluva a lot more sense than the press release I saw. I hope it’s right. The GP should retain some sort of track-day superiority for at least a year!
Diego Lopez Aug 8th, 2006 Link
yeah, i’d hope the GP would stay on top for now…considering i put down for one ;)
Mark (Ohio) Aug 8th, 2006 Link
…ugh come on, who really drives a stock MCS or even fully stock JCW MCS anyway! :)
eto Aug 8th, 2006 Link
Well, now it looks like the mystery is the difference in lap times for the current generation Cooper S and the JCW. If that can be located, all the puzzle pieces will fall into place… :D
GPMINI Aug 9th, 2006 Link
The GP is 14 secs faster around the ring than a “stock” JCW? Only if “stock” means that said JCW did not have the JCW suspension. With the same suspension and brakes, these two cars would be very, very close. A 3% weight reduction and 4% more peak hp would not give the GP much of an edge at all. Don’t believe the hype. It’s a skin job.
Mark Hendrie Aug 9th, 2006 Link
I wonder if anyone short of a professional driver could actually tell the difference and appreciate it?
Ian C. Aug 9th, 2006 Link
GPMINI – you’ve got my name! ;) Remember there is also some aero differences on the GP. I’m not claiming they contribute these differences but they also could be factored into your weight drop & peak power “calculation”
chows4us Aug 9th, 2006 Link
This 14 second thing is misleading and perhaps deceiving.
The JCW reference is from this car
8:55 Mini Cooper S Works, 200 hp (sport auto ??/04)
So they are comparing the GP against a MY2004 JCW with both the OLD JCW kit AND the older gearing. The newer gearing should be a lot quicker accelerating out of those 200+ turns and lets add in the additional 10 bhp.
I would imagine a MY05 210 JCW to be very close to the GP times at the ring.
This is very misleading.
This is very misleading.
Maybe I’m missing something here but how do you know what car and spec BMW is referencing in their PR release?
chows4us Aug 9th, 2006 Link
The only comprehensive list of Ring times on the Internet (at least that I could find) is here http://www.supercars.net/PitLane?viewThread=y&gID=3&fID=0&tID=10073 Other lists tend to refer to this list.
The 2004 JCW 200 car on this list is 14 seconds slower than the GP quoted in here http://www.worldcarfans.com/news.cfm/newsID/2060623.003/page/1/country/ecf/lang/eng/mini/mini-cooper-s-jcw-gp-kit-in-depth and noted by Diego above.
The logical conclusion is that we are talking about the same car as that is the only published time for a JCW. If it were a 2005 JCW 210, I would presume it would have to be quicker. However, I cannot definitively say that is true but I think this is a very good and logical conclusion.
Ian C. Aug 9th, 2006 Link
Full quote from the British Motor Show press release: Comparison tests on the race track proved that the MINI GP offers even better performance than the popular MINI Cooper S with the JCW Tuning Kit. The MINI GP laps the Nordschleife of NҼrburgring in under 8 minutes, 42 seconds. Almost 14 seconds faster than the production model. The ‘GP’ benefits not only from its greater engine power, but also from aerodynamic improvements that reduce lift on both the front and rear axle
GPMINI Aug 9th, 2006 Link
GPMINI – you’ve got my name! ;)
Sorry? Looks like your name is Ian.
GPMINI Aug 9th, 2006 Link
Remember there is also some aero differences on the GP. I’m not claiming they contribute these differences but they also could be factored into your weight drop & peak power “calculationâ€Â
Like I said… skin job. Ok, I’ll give you 1 second for a bit more downforce in the rear. ;) However, I strongly doubt that they dialed in enough oversteer on the production car to really take advantage of this.
karlInSanDiego Aug 10th, 2006 Link
My favorite Nurburgring lapping is a woman kicking major butt in a Ford Transit Van
http://www.dumpalink.com/media/1135852351/Top_Gear_NѼrburgring
Frank Aug 10th, 2006 Link
Please let’s compare apples to apples, shall we?
I would like to see a comparo between a ‘05+ JCW 210HP equipped MCS vs a ‘06 MCS JCW GP. I have a gut feeling the time differences between the two will be substantially lesser than 14 seconds.
I agree with Chows4us. Something doesn’t jive here.
Philip Aug 10th, 2006 Link
It’s all down to the driver anyway! There is guys kicking my butt in a MINI One on the Nordschleife, so relax anyone. (And I have done over 60 fast laps on the Nordschleife in my MCS – so I’m not a beginner.)
chows4us Aug 10th, 2006 Link
The fact that one driver may be quicker than another is not relavent to the published Ring times. Take a look at some of the drivers listed … you got factory drivers in there like Walther RÒ¶hrl … others like Hans Stuck and the Covette Chief Engineer Dave Hill. These numbers are for bragging rights. Don’t you think Corvette wants the best possible numbers for the Z06 so they claim they are faster than say a 997S for much less money?
For example, the fact that the Cayman S is actually four seconds quicker than the base 997 driven by the same factory driver has, from what I read, shaken some of the 997 faithful.
Something isn’t right here. MINI should specifically state which cars they are comparing or the numbers are meaningless.
Ian C. Aug 10th, 2006 Link
GPMINI – note the smiley in my original comment, and then see http://www.gpmini.net/mtblog/ ;)
Philip Aug 11th, 2006 Link
chows4us, trust me. You can get the same driver to drive the same car on two different days and he might do lap times with quite different times. The Nordschleife is beast. There is many factors that will effect lap times.
But what I really wanted to remind everyone is, that if you’re a really good, concentrated driver, you will easily beat the other guy in his GP.
And then again, aren’t we here for the fun? :-D
carcounsel.com Aug 13th, 2006 Link
not to get too far off track here but with BMWs RWD cars, each generation’s standard model stands close to the outgoing generation’s ‘tuned’ variant. e.g. the E36 M3 sedan rough equivalent to E46 330i is roughly equivalent to E90 328i in power and torque production – tracks get wider and body strength:mass ratios, high speed lift and suspension kinematics are better managed with successive generations as well.
i’m not saying i believe 14 seconds, but if the new Cooper car has the flat bottom that the current 5 and 3 series cars sport for example I could see that as bringing the standard car to roughly where the GP stands in aero managment, surely a much bigger deal on a high speed track like the ring.
HTML Formatting Tips
MotoringFile also allows use of Markdown formatting in the comment section. This accomplishes the same formatting as HTML but is typically easy to use.
| _your text_ | → | your text |
| **your text** | → | your text |
| `my code` | → | my code |
| * Bulleted list * Second item | → | • Bulleted list • Second item |
| 1. Numbered list 1. Second item | → | 1. Numbered list 2. Second item |
| [link name](URL) | → | link name |
| *** | → | Horizontal ruler |
| <http://url> <email@add.com> | → | Auto-linked |
|  | → | Image |
Copyright © 2002-2009 Gabriel Bridger
