Limited Slip Unavailable on Factory JCW MINI

Paul Apr 30th, 2008 Link

Could part of this be that software costs very little to develop and install in relation to the production costs of a mechanical LSD. I am sure that it may offer its pros over a LSD, but the cynic in me does not believe that is purely because its THAT much better.

Reply

Josh Wardell Apr 30th, 2008 Link

I’m speechless. Is MINI trying to be as moronic as possible? Maybe they’re just seeding rumors and we’ll get LSD and a real suspension as a surprise gift.

Reply

Jon Apr 30th, 2008 Link

Look forward to seeing if the weight savings and the system performance pays off. I am usually more comfortable with mechanical systems than electronic systems of this type but willing to not preclude this development by Mini before getting hands on it to see how it works in person.

Reply

Timothy Apr 30th, 2008 Link

Not sure how a mechanical LSD would save you from “Fowl weather.” Chickens flying off trucks or ducks pelting your windshield are tough enough to deal with regardless of the technology your car uses.

Mr. Obvious prediction: The purists are gonna hate this.

Reply

Brice Apr 30th, 2008 Link

Makes sense why they felt the need to upgrade the brakes even further. . .

Makes me feel better and better about being the proud owner of a 2006 Factory JCW car. Still the best of the breed (short of the GP, but frankly I like having a sunroof, back seats, and nav).

Reply

dave Apr 30th, 2008 Link

he’s speechless, i’m slackjawed

sure is very disappointing but not too perplexing, ‘cuz it doesn’t really make sense to have a e-diff lock and lsd at the same time. why not just fit a better different lsd to the jcw car? that said, maybe the electronic gizmo will work as well as the mechanical one which would be pretty cool, but i’d still probably rather have the lsd

Reply

Jon Apr 30th, 2008 Link

So far havn’t seen the best reviews about the BMW attempts down this path. One thing for sure I would not be spending the money on this system until I was able to get some hands on time.

Having said that I would go for the LSD every time personally.

Reply

Plaz Apr 30th, 2008 Link

Wow, that’s really dumb. Even if the LSD IS unnecessary with these systems, why not still offer the option for those who want it?

I don’t get it.

Reply

JFS Apr 30th, 2008 Link

Since DCS will be standard on the ‘09 R56s… Is it safe to assume that the ‘09 MCS will also loose the optional mechanical LSD?

TIA.

Reply

Pedro Apr 30th, 2008 Link

Makes me even happier with my R53 with LSD, which has smoked full JCW cars on the track. What are they thinking here!?!?

Reply

Ken E. Apr 30th, 2008 Link

Offering options that over lap in the eyes of the manufacture would be cost prohibitive.

On the other hand if it doesn’t work or is not equal to the system it replaces. It would be smart to offer alternatives or what until it is perfected.

Reply

AlexM Apr 30th, 2008 Link

JFS, it’s the EDLC that mimics the LSD, not DSC/DTC, so you will still be able to get the mechanical LSD on the ‘09 R56s

Reply

smokem Apr 30th, 2008 Link

I didn’t know BMW had this in previous cars. I heard the 1 series has them. I think the 1 series and the JCW will be the proving grounds (or disproving grounds) for the other models. So far, I’ve read that some 1 series drivers were unimpressed with this ELSD. We’ll see.

It sucks because in order to get the better engine, brakes, turbo and transmission, you have to get this LSD. And the unproven technology is at the worst possible place ~ where traction is involved. I hope it works.

Reply

Plaz Apr 30th, 2008 Link

It’s interesting that BMW is following a reverse trend here. In the BMW lines, only the “M” cars have LSDs… in the MINIs only the JCW cars don’t have them available. Odd.

It’s pretty much universally derided amongst enthusiasts that LSDs are not available on non-M cars, too… especially among those who track or auto-x their cars.

It’s not helpful when you turn off the DSC then spin the inside drive wheel on every turn. One wheel drive peg-leggedness is antithetical to fun, and certainly not keeping with the “ultimate driving machine” claim.

Reply

Shamus Apr 30th, 2008 Link

Imagine the brake wear!!! Sure, the LSD has it’s faults (weight and total torque split), but it goes about it’s business with zero maintenance. The mechanical seamlessness we’ve come to expect from LSDs has sadly become the purview of compter programing… and we all know MINI’s history with that!

Reply

spokane mini Apr 30th, 2008 Link

I have had a deposit on a factory JCW car for nearly a year. I currently have an early 05 S without LSD. The traction control is terribly intrusive, shutting off the car at the most dangerous moments when you really need to accelerate. I track the car, and the other MINI’s that I run with who have LSD, are much faster coming out of the tight turns. The main reason that I want a new MINI is to get LSD. From what I have read and talked with to BMW owners who have the electronic LSD, they are far inferior to the mechanical set ups on the track. I may have an after market LSD put on my 05 and cancel my JCW factory order! This really sucks!

Reply

dc11 Apr 30th, 2008 Link

hello accelerated brake fade!!!!

and why does MINI keep doing toggle switches with default as “off”??? The sport button should be a switch, and this ELDC should be a switch. I understand that most people won’t use it, but at the same time, it would be nice to not have to press/hold a button everytime I start the car.

the product planners should be fired.

Reply

cct1 Apr 30th, 2008 Link

This is not good. But you still should be able to install an aftermarket LSD, but it’s gonna cost some buck…

I wrote elsewhere about a very, very good driver in a 135i on the track this past weekend–and the first thing he was going to do to the car after a day and a half on the track was put a true LSD on the car. The edif just wasn’t very good on the track, and he was very frustrated with it. Maybe the MINI will be different, being front wheel drive, I’m skeptical. My suspicion is BMW went this route for better control of the torque steer, which the edif should be better at, at the potential expense of decreased performance in the corners with a true LSD (I’d rather have the latter).

We’ll have to see how the system works on the MINI, but’s not as good as a true LSD on the track on the 135i…

Reply

Jon Apr 30th, 2008 Link

The question will be if with the transmission changes they are doing with the JCW car if fitting a LSD will be possible, figure this could be part of the issue why its not offered.

Reply

Bilbo Baggins Apr 30th, 2008 Link

Since when does it make sense to apply the brakes when you are trying to accelerate?

Please, give me a proper gear type LSD!

Reply

cct1 Apr 30th, 2008 Link

Jon, it can be fitted to the 135i, so I’ll bet there’ll be an aftermarket solution at some point, as long as there is enough demand…

Reply

Jon Apr 30th, 2008 Link

I agree cctl, not sure if we can make any assumptions though until we get some more info on what specifically they have done to the transmission. I am sure that somebody will figure a way to hook one up regardlessly of what Mini has done. I will be looking forward to hearing from a couple of the aftermarket tuners once this car hits the street.

Reply

paul Apr 30th, 2008 Link

in other LSD news: Swiss chemist Albert Hoffmann, father of the mind altering drug LSD, died today. He was 102.

Reply

Kennedy Apr 30th, 2008 Link

Alright, so I’m an engineer and still am on the fence trying to understand if this has hopes of achieving the benefits of a mechanal LSD or not. So far, this is how I understand it…
An open differential sends power via the path of least resistance, so when cornering, you send your power to the inside wheel, because it has the least amount of weight (and hence least amount of traction), so… as a result the inside wheel spins. An LSD actually is accomplished either by additional gears or a clutch (the MINI is a clutch-system) in the differential that basically can transfer some percent of torque to the opposite wheel (the one with the most traction). This allows you to keep driving the car forward and power out of the corner, etc. The eDiff, or EDLC, basically attempts to mimic a mechancal LSD by applying brakes to 1) stop the wheel from spinning, resulting in that tire having more traction and 2) tricking the differential that the outside tire is actually the “path of least resistance” — or at least that’s how I understand it. So, by applying one brake hard, you force power out of the other wheel. So you can transfer up to 50% torque by clamping down on the brake on the inside wheel about to the same degree that you have traction on the outside wheel. I would have to think this is much better than an open differential because you can get the power to the outside wheel… but you are definitely losing some power just to overcome the braking on the inside wheel. So, I have to wonder just how much power is lost fighting the brake? In truth, I guess a counterpoint is that most LSDs that I know of can only transfer about 50% or less power anyway (as Gabe said about 30% for the MINI), so even with the MINI LSD, 70% of your power could just be going to smoking the inner tire. So, perhaps the real point to be made is that unless you have an LSD system that can transfer 100% of the torque and convert all available power into moving foward, an (evolved) eDiff may be able to work just as well as a mechanical LSD, IF the losses involved in fighting the brake aren’t significantly high, and IF it can act quickly enough. Geesh, sorry so long… Anyone know if I got that right?

Reply

nuvolari Apr 30th, 2008 Link

So, first I learn that I have to pay a huge sum to upgrade the drivetrain to handle the amount of power it should have been designed to handle in the first place (like the R53) and now I cannot get a real LSD. This JCW is looking like a real winner, people.

Reply

Jon Apr 30th, 2008 Link

To me its no worry, my GP has lsd ;)

Reply

Victor Apr 30th, 2008 Link

EDLC is junk. Period.

LSD on my MINI just increased it’s value.

Reply

MINIme Apr 30th, 2008 Link

Watching from afar, it appears that MINI has screwed the pooch on the JCW car. I wish they would have left JCW alone and allowed it to continue as an aftermarket tuner company catering to MINI. This is another classic example of a big company swallowing up a small company to the detriment of both enitities AND the consumer. Good show MINI. Are you sure this isn’t an American company??

Reply

nuvolari Apr 30th, 2008 Link

Word, MINIme. It all started when they introduced an automatic transmission on the MCS, imo. They have been sliding down the slippery slope of compromise into the densely populated swamp of automotive mediocrity ever since. And with such a brilliant start, too. D@mn shame.

Reply

Gabe Apr 30th, 2008 Link

I wrote elsewhere about a very, very good driver in a 135i on the track this past weekend–and the first thing he was going to do to the car after a day and a half on the track was put a true LSD on the car. The edif just wasn’t very good on the track, and he was very frustrated with it. Maybe the MINI will be different, being front wheel drive, I’m skeptical.

I’ve driven it about as hard as you can on one of the best roads in North American and found the ELDC to (surprisingly) work for the most part. It did prevent the tire roasting that would have normally happened with no intervention. That said I can see how I wouldn’t feel as confident with it on the track like I would LSD. Of course I won’t know personally until I get either a 135i or a JCW off the street and on a course of some kind. But I’m not overly optimistic.

My suspicion is BMW went this route for better control of the torque steer, which the edif should be better at, at the potential expense of decreased performance in the corners with a true LSD (I’d rather have the latter).

I believe that BMW has gone this route for several reasons. BMW likes to solve things electronically because it’s cheaper, there are less parts to fail (a good thing for all parties involved) and it’s a lightweight solution (again a plus). That said if I had a choice there’s no question I’d personally opt for a real LSD.

So, first I learn that I have to pay a huge sum to upgrade the drivetrain to handle the amount of power it should have been designed to handle in the first place (like the R53) and now I cannot get a real LSD. This JCW is looking like a real winner, people.

I’ve talked to quite a few people at MINI over the last year and had lots of discussions I’ve been sworn to secrecy about. While I can’t get too specific I will say that I think your assumptions (the R53’s gearbox etc being built to take more power) is incorrect. For one (and this is the big one) the problem with the R56 factory JCW is torque – it’s greater than even what the GP’s (and that’s the official figure, not the unofficial numbers I’ve seen). And of course MINI wouldn’t have spent the money on swapping out something like a transmission on such a limited edition car like the GP. The business case wouldn’t justify it like it does for a more widely sold model.

Reply

AUSmotive.com » Blog Archive » MINI drops LSD on factory JCW models Apr 30th, 2008 Link

[...] Source: Motoringfile.com  [...]

nuvolari Apr 30th, 2008 Link

Gabe, my understanding is that the block of the R53 was upgraded over the R50 with forged crank, uprated bearings and improved oiling to handle JCW+ power levels. Afaik, there is no difference between the R56 Cooper and S engines. Am I wrong about that?

And I have personally put 80k hard miles, including many track days, on the Getrag 6 speed and stock clutch at 180 ftlbs peak torque at the crank with zero issues, and many people are driving competitively with stock R53 drivetrains, so I think that sh!t’s pretty solid.

Reply

Gabe Apr 30th, 2008 Link

And I have personally put 80k hard miles, including many track days, on the Getrag 6 speed and stock clutch at 180 ftlbs peak torque at the crank with zero issues, and many people are driving competitively with stock R53 drivetrains, so I think that sh!t’s pretty solid.

Last thing I’m going to do is make any blanket statements about R53 or R56 reliability – I’ll leave that for NAM :) I will however gladly review a new JCW on the track if MINI will give me one.

Reply

c4 Apr 30th, 2008 Link

I believe there are differences in terms of reinforced components between the R56 N/A and turbocharged engines.

Unfortunately, both R53 and R56 suffers from the same hit or miss LuK OEM clutch disk/flywheel assemblies that either seem to die prematurely or last forever if they are well abused.

Reply

nuvolari Apr 30th, 2008 Link

c4, my bad, I was talking US-spec cars. Both the US Cooper and S models are turbocharged, correct? So I’m assuming no differences between the bottom half of those engines.

Reply

nuvolari Apr 30th, 2008 Link

Gabe, what’s NMA? Nameless Mechanical Authority? :)

Reply

scabpicker May 1st, 2008 Link

The R56 S and plain Cooper engines aren’t that similar. Just the general block dimensions are the same.

The turbo engine block gets steel sintered onto the aluminum around the crank journals, and it gets an oil/water heat exchanger. The blocks are cast in different processes, (n/a=lost foam, turbo=low pressure), and the heads are totally different. Plus, the turbo engine gets different pistons with a different combustion chamber.

The R53 has a lot to speak for it, but the tritec engine is not necessarily the best in comparison to the prince series, at least not on the technology front. I’m still a little wigged by its Peugeot heritage, and that it might be too clever for its own good in the end. But it is quite a tech monster.

Reply

Gabe May 1st, 2008 Link

I’m still a little wigged by its Peugeot heritage, and that it might be too clever for its own good in the end. But it is quite a tech monster.

Just to reiterate what has been on MF in the past. The engine was designed by BMW (I’ve talked to the german engineer who headed the project and lead the design). The block is cast in a PSA plant. It’s then shipped over to the UK where the entire thing is manufactured.

The JCW modifications were engineered and design solely at BMW in Munich. Someday maybe I’ll be able to let slip some of the more impressive details but lets just say it has some pedigree (despite not having LSD).

Reply

C4 May 1st, 2008 Link

The Tritec engine might not be a “Tour de Force” in the technological front, but it is still a damn impressive little engine in Supercharged guise and virtually bulletproof to boot.

Not bad for a powerplant that was pretty much put together in 12 months by then former Chrysler Corporation in the ‘96-’97 time period.

Reply

nuvolari May 1st, 2008 Link

scabpicker – but aren’t both US-spec R56 engines (S and Cooper) turbos and therefore identical? I thought only the One was NA.

Reply

Brice May 1st, 2008 Link

Gabe, you said this does a good job of preventing one tire roasting, but does it do what a true LSD does (allow TWO wheel roasting)? That to me is the measure of whether the systems are equivalent, and I can’t see it doing this. If it applies the brake to the inside wheel, seems like it would eventually just make the outside wheel be the “peg leg” (this is admittedly better than without intervention, but still fundamentally different than a proper LSD).

Reply

Chris May 1st, 2008 Link

My interest in the JCW Mini has gone from tepid to completely limp.

Reply

robble May 1st, 2008 Link

nuvolari.

ONLY the S model is turbo charged in the US.

Reply

Craig May 1st, 2008 Link

The Cooper motor is naturaly aspirated NOT turbo. The Cooper motor also has BMW’s valvetronic tech which provides continuously variable timing and lift for intake and exhaust valves. This eliminates the need for a throttle plate except as a failsafe measure. The Cooper S motor is nearly completely different.

Reply

Craig May 1st, 2008 Link

Correction, the Cooper D (not sold in the USA) is a turbocharged DIESEL motor. The petrol motor in the Cooper is nealy identical worldwide.

Reply

Erich May 1st, 2008 Link

How much does the LSD weigh?

Reply

dc11 May 1st, 2008 Link

“I believe that BMW has gone this route for several reasons. BMW likes to solve things electronically because it’s cheaper, there are less parts to fail (a good thing for all parties involved) and it’s a lightweight solution (again a plus). That said if I had a choice there’s no question I’d personally opt for a real LSD.”

its a shame that the first thing to fail on all BMWs are the electronics… typically within the first 6 months of ownership =)

in any case, im still waiting for my 1.8-2.0L turbo motor (by means of either bore or stroking, or both), LSD, aero kit, and suspension, for under $32K… that way, it actually has a chance against the R32 which seems vastly superior to the mini interior, exterior, and performance. Even the GTI looks like a better deal. The only thing that mini has going for it is the look of the mini itself. and again, i really hate VW, but i might be forced to go that route at that price point.

if mini doesn’t announce a GP version within 12 months, i will completely give up on mini.

Reply

Mozza May 1st, 2008 Link

The JCW modifications were engineered and design solely at BMW in Munich. Someday maybe I’ll be able to let slip some of the more impressive details but lets just say it has some pedigree (despite not having LSD).

I know you can’t come right out and say it Gabe but I think I see what you’re getting at here. If I’m inferring correctly then that’s iMpressive ;-).

Reply

Dr Obnxs May 3rd, 2008 Link

We’ll see how this one works out, but I’m betting that electronics will win over the basic mechanical systems. Despite the reputation for electronic gremlins, automotive electronics are very reliable (at least engine managment function, no claims to entertainment iDrive type stuff). Electronic systems are easlily variable (multiple settings like high end DSC systems) that are really hard to do with pure mechanical systems. Mechanical systems for differntials can’t take steering input into account, like the electronic systems can.

Do some reading on what’s in the EVO MR or the GT-R. Electronics up the wazoo! Anyone complaining about how fast the GT-R is around the Nurburgring? Don’t think so…..

As far as automotive electronics in general, everyone biatched about the end of the carborator and the onset of electronic fuel injection, but now without it, we wouldn’t have the power and efficiency numbers that we have.

Want mechanical timing? Centripital weights and a vacuum diaphram in a distributor? Not me…. Give me a crank triggered CPU controlled timing curve with a knock sensor to keep things in check any day of the week.

Just some other examples to think about, for all those that bitch about the changes coming to todays cars….

What’s usually the problem for the Mini (And other lower cost cars) is that while the systems ARE much more capable than the mechanical systems they replace, we don’t get access to the full system operating range like the higher end cars. DSC is a perfect example. We’re stuck with a rather bad compramize (out of the box) while high end cars get multiple setting levels that can even allow for some nice, uh, oversteer situations in aggressive turns. We get what we get, one setting, love it or hate it. Like all compramises, there are places where it’s good, others where it’s not so good.

So I guess what’s bad is we’re getting high end systems in low end cars, and suffer for it.

Matt

Reply

cct1 May 3rd, 2008 Link

You may be right, but the reviews of the 135i’s ediff have been less than stellar, and after seeing the 135i on the track this past weekend, I’m very skeptical it will be any better on the MINI. We’ll see…

I’m not sure why they didn’t leave the LSD as an option though–it should still be theoretically possible to put it on, and for $500, the LSD was one of the few options on the MINI that could really be considered a bargain. A cynic would say maybe that’s why they got rid of it….:)

Reply

MotoringFile » Archive » Why the JCW Factory MINI will not get LSD. Jun 24th, 2008 Link

[...] Further reading on EDLC at MF [...]