Logo



Exclusive: 2014 F56 MINI Official US MPG Figures

P90144666-F56

Next week the EPA will officially release final MPG figures on the 2014 F56 MINI manual and preliminary ones for automatic models. As we could see with MINI’s estimated figures back in January, these final figures paint an interesting picture of how MINI has attempted to further differentiate the Cooper and Cooper S and the results that has had on efficiency. Let’s take a look at the rundown.

  • Cooper auto: 29 City / 34 Combined / 41 Highway (preliminary)
  • Cooper manual 30 City / 34 Combined / 42 Highway
  • Cooper S auto: 27 City / 31 Combined / 38 Highway (preliminary)
  • Cooper S manual 25 City / 29 Combined / 38 Highway

P90144728-F56

The Cooper and How it Compares to the R50 and R56

The Cooper especially has substantially increased performance while increasing MPG. However it’s not the upward trend some had hoped when it comes to city figures. We’d expect the new 9 speed auto to change this in a few years. In the meantime however we have a Cooper that is much quicker than before with substantially better overall MPG. Not bad in our opinion.

model

city

combined

highway

Cooper R50 auto

23

26

31

Cooper R50 manual

24

28

33

Cooper R56 auto

28

31

36

Cooper R56 manual

29

32

37

Cooper F56 auto (Preliminary)

29

34

41

Cooper F56 manual

30

34

42

P90144778-F56

The Cooper S and How it Compares to the R53 and R56

This is where things get interesting. W’ve mentioned previously that it was MINI’s intention to pull apart the Cooper and Cooper S in terms of performance and this is perhaps a by-product of that. The Cooper S manual has actually lost ground on the “CITY” cycle dropping 2 mpg. In fact that drop alone affects the overall combined score enough to actually drop the new MINI 1 MPG from the previous manual MCS. Keep it in perspective though. The engine is now a full 2.0L with with seat of the pants performance equal to the previous JCW power plant. Based on our experiences driving the car, there’s a greater drivability to the engine given the amount of torque and the eagerness of the engine to rev. And with 2.0L there’s also much more potential in the engine for JCW and tuners alike.

Of course that doesn’t change the fact that the new MINI Cooper S manual (the one many if you will likely want) is technically less efficient than the previous one in the city and overall. You’ll have to do more highway mileage to truly call the new MCS an improvement in efficiency.

model

city

combined

highway

Cooper S R53 auto

21

24

29

Cooper S R53 manual

22

24

29

Cooper S R56 auto

26

29

34

Cooper S R56 manual

27

30

35

Cooper S F56 auto (Preliminary)

27

31

38

Cooper S F56 manual

25

29

38


Written By: Gabe

  • donburnside

    Interesting and awesome, although I was expecting slight higher highway numbers. Still, 41 is pretty awesome and I bet on a long road trip with cruise control that number could be a little higher. Maybe a day of hypermiling during MTTS is in order.

    • ArkansasDeb

      That’s not a good thing to do in a large group of cars. It’s okay for you, but murder on the cars following, and on the leader trying to keep everyone together.

      I’ve led many groups of MINIs on drives, and the most disruptive member of the group is the laggard.

  • Kevin Bartlett

    My R53 JCW has always done 25MPG at the worst (normally in the winter), and often does 27 to 28 MPG on my combined normal commute. BUT I’ve never done better than 30 MPG on the highway so if the F56 can do 38 MPG with consistency it would be a welcome gain. I will keep my eye on what people really report as the new cars hit the streets. In my mind I still prefer the supercharger I’ve got to the turbo cars.

    • Erik06MCS

      Agreed. I consistently average 29mpg on my 2006 R53 with mild mods (Pulley, intake, exhaust, intercooler).

      My feeling is that BMW was a bit conservative with their economy numbers. Would like to see what consumers report after a while behind the wheels. Hopefully a bit higher than what is reported here as these numbers for the S are not impressive. This car is essentially a decade newer technology with the same combined mpg that I already average on my R53.

      • http://bridger.us/ Gabriel Bridger

        Yes BMW is conservative in the typical German fashion in regards to any MPG or performance figure. An example of why you should do this is the current MPG related class action lawsuit against Hyundai.

        • http://www.nathanielsalzman.com/ Nathaniel Salzman

          …and a similar one against Honda.

        • Jason

          and Ford, lol.

  • SPICYJCWCOUPE

    It appears that the city/combined figures for the base R56 have been mistakenly transposed on both the auto & manual in this article!!! There is no way that combined figures can be LESS than city mileage. And to add to that error, the narrative carries it by stating ‘the F56 cooper actually loses 2MPG in the city while gaining overall’. NOT TRUE!

    By transposing the city/combined figures of the R56 Cooper to their correct positions, the F56 would GAIN 1 MPG city. I saw this error 2 months ago when ‘estimated’ figures were coming out. Proof reading is always a good thing!!

    • huh?

      Looks right to me. Either you misread or they must have fixed it after your post.

      • http://bridger.us/ Gabriel Bridger

        It’s fixed. Numbers were transposed for a few minutes after posting.

  • SPICYJCWCOUPE

    It’s interesting to see in these figures that the F56 Cooper’s mileage figures for the preliminary automatic are equal/LESS by 1 MPG than the manual. Then looking at the S, they are equal/GREATER by 2 MPG for the automatic over the manual.

    Based on this, the automatic is less efficient than the manual on the 3 cyl, & more efficient than the manual on the 4 cyl??!! Any word as when these ‘preliminary’ figures for the automatics will become ‘official’??

    • http://bridger.us/ Gabriel Bridger

      Soon I’m told.

    • Clubman PHEV or diesel please!

      I posted about this awhile back. Without doing the calculations and posting them again, the Cooper S manual has a more aggressive gearing than the automatic. I forgot the numbers, but if I recall MCS has a higher final drive ratio and over drive gears… so MCS engine needs to rotate more to cover the same distance as non S.

  • KPP

    These figures do not account for auto start/stop correct? I think city mileage will be better then the numbers show based on this option. I, personally, am thrilled to have a car with that option.

    • http://bridger.us/ Gabriel Bridger

      The EPA doesn’t account for start/stop systems period. In fact the more you read about the automotive regs that the EPA (and NHTSA) impose on US cars the more you’ll wonder those agencies aren’t more advanced with their testing and standards.

      • BimmerFile_Michael

        Auto stop starts benefits register with automatics because it is effective once “drive” is selected. So automatics do benefit from auto stop start in the EPA cycle with the mpg numbers. Manuals require the driver shift into neutral and lift off the clutch to initiate the feature- this is NOT part of the EPA methodology and it is not factored in.

        This is the reason that initially BMW only brought the auto stop start system with automatic gear boxes stateside as there was no benefit with the manual in EPA numbers and it had a cost adder- NOW economies of scale actually made it the same cost to use in the manual as the entire world is using it so there was no cost factor to consider really and hence all models get it now.

  • oldsbear

    Our 2011 MCSm does a real-world combined 34 mpg. It will be interesting to see what the F56 does in the real world.

  • SPICYJCWCOUPE

    Mileage for the departing R56 S hatch indicates 27/30/35 for city/combined/hwy. When I had my ’08 MCS S hatch with manual, I averaged about 31+ MPG for combined in my local driving. But I was able to get lots more on a hwy trip than the official figures. On a 900 mile trip from TPA to DC, keeping within 5 miles of the speed limit, I was able to get 41.2 MPG average for the 1800 miles round trip!! The toughest part of that trip was KEEPING it within 5 miles of the speed limit as everyone flew past me!!

    So the F56 S driven the same way on that trip could probably get ‘well above’ the 41 MPG that I got with the R56S. Doing the same trip with my current ’12 JCWCoupe which has 26/30/35 figures, My combined is no more than about 29-30 MPG. But I was able to squeak out about 36 MPG hwy if keeping my speed below 80 on the interstate. Tough to do with the JCWCoupe!

  • one9deuce

    How big is the gas tank on the F56 Hatch?

    • SPICYJCWCOUPE

      I could be a couple of tenths off, but I think the gas tank on the F56 is down to ‘about’ 11.7 U.S. gals compared to 13.2 on the R56. Saw the specs info back in Jan but don’t have it at hand right now. Why they would drop the capacity that much, is strange. So even with better mileage the cars won’t go any further on a tank.

      • SPICYJCWCOUPE

        Found the MF article from Jan 30 F56 Cooper/S U.S specs… It only has a 11.6 gal fuel tank. That’s 1.6 gals less that the 13.2 R56 tank!!! Guess the higher the mileage rating the smaller the fuel tank!! But that seems quite a bit less capacity for the new mileage figures.

        • http://bridger.us/ Gabriel Bridger

          I would expect MINI planned on having a similar range given estimated fuel economy. I’m guessing in the real world range will be about the same.

        • TheMotoringAdvisor

          The UKL platform is part of the equation, also the fact they squeezed another 2 cu. feet of storage space in the back ( basically a full size carry-on piece of luggage) is another reason. Most people purchasing MINI’s live in the city so trips to the pump won’t be that noticed with the size only dropping 1.6 gallons. I will gladly be able to show newcomers to the brand how a MINI is the perfect all-around vehicle if there needs dictate a smaller (and more fun) alternative to the completion.

        • jbkone

          I thought I saw in one article that the Cooper and the S had different sized tanks. ??

  • robble

    “the F56 Cooper auto actually loses 2 mpg in the city” – I’m sorry but the numbers don’t support that statement at all.

  • Tim H

    I’m curious. How will the eco mode affect these figures if say you drive 1/3 the time in that mode?

  • Henry Wu

    Also worth nothing, I don’t believe these cars were tested in Green Mode… numbers may even be higher for those who can resist the temptation of mashing the throttle.

    • http://bridger.us/ Gabriel Bridger

      No – they are tested in standard mode.

  • Sal

    Just got back from test driving my F56 Cooper S. It arrived at the dealership early. It is unbelievably improved. It is a tighter more comfortable ride than the R56 S yet the engine is a revelation of refinement and power. I have owned two R56’s, an S hatch and a Clubman S. This is definitely a totally different car.The auto is quite improved and the suspension is really top notch. I drove through some pot holed streets, construction on the highway as well as city backstreets and highway straights. I drove in economy, mid and sport mode. Economy was nice, mid was fun and sport was terrific. In the R56, Sport was a wild setting reserved for special occasions . The current sport has such a fun character with tight control that you want you will want to keep it set that way all the time. Now I also ordered the adjustable dampers but couldn’t find that setting. Gabe, do the dampers adjust based on drive setting or is the control hidden in the beautiful Center Nav system? The interior was much richer than the R56. I ordered the leather, cloth cross check. It looks very nice. I also ordered the red color line and I think it makes the interior of the car. Two small niggling points, I didn’t like the Blazing red, it doesn’t look like the photos and seems more orange, also the boot lid cover is black and looks out of place with the white roof. Unfortunately, I will not be able to take delivery until 4/15 at the earliest and lease plans and proving are unavailable. It is a terrible tease. I’ve posted one photo but will have to edit their size for posting.


Sort by MINI model

MotoringFile on Instagram








MINI Model Cheat Sheet

1st Gen MINI
R50: One & MC Hatch
R52: All 1st Gen MINI Convt.
R53: MCS Hatch
2nd Gen MINI
R55: Clubman
R56: Hatch
R57: Convertible
R58: Coupe
R59: Roadster
R60: MINI Crossover
R61: MINI Crossover Coupe
3rd Gen MINI
F54: Clubman
F55: Five Door Hatch
F56: Hatch
F57: Convertible
F60: MINI Crossover
F58: Traveller

Advertise with MotoringFile

If you or your company are interested in advertising on the most influential MINI website in the world, please visit our Advertising section. If you have further questions about becoming a sponsor or would like to see our rate sheet please feel free to contact us directly.
mini mini
Translate MotoringFile with Google: 
 

BF

MotoringFile Buyers Guides

R50 ('02-'06 MC) Buyers Guide
R53 ('02-'06 MCS) Buyers Guide

BF

SF



MotoringFile Reviews

Reviews:
'12 JCW Coupe
'11 Fiat 500 Sport
'11 Tesla Roaster 2.5 '11 Countryman Comparo
'11 Cooper S Hatch
'11 Countryman MCS (FWD)
'11 Countryman MC (auto)
'10 Mayfair MCS (auto)
'11 Countryman MCS (ALL4)
'10 MINI E
'10 Tesla Roadster Sport
'09 Cooper S Convertible
'09 JCW Hatch
'09 JCW Clubman
JCW Stage I vs JCW Stage II
'08 Clubman S (Auto)
1st Drive: '08 MINI Clubman
'08 Smart Fourtwo
Comparison: '08 BMW 135i
'06 R53 MCS vs '07 R56 MCS
'07 R56 JCW (Stage 1)
'07 MINI Cooper S Long Term
'07 BMW Z4 M Coupe
'07 MINI Cooper & Cooper S
Audio: '07 MC/MCS at the Track
'06 JCW GP Long term
Reader Review: JCW GP
'06 JCW Cooper S Long Term
Comparison: '06 Lotus Elise
Comparison: '06 Mazda MX5
Comparison: '06 UK Focus ST
Comparison: '06 Civic Si
Comparison: '04 TVR T350
Comparison: '06 Nissan 350z
Comparison: '06 VW GTI w/DSG
Podcast: Cooper S Auto
Podcast: BMW 325i
Podcast: JCW MC Soundkit
'04 JCW MINI Cooper Tuning Kit
'05 MCS: One Month Review
'05 MCS Auto
'05 JCW S 1st Drive
'05 MINI Cooper
'05 MCS Conv. Long Term
'05 MINI Cooper S
'05 MCS Cabrio 1st Drive
'04 JCW MCS First Drive
'04 MC w/JCW Tuning Kit
BMW M3 SMG Vs. MCS
'04 MINI Cooper CVT
'02 MCS 3 year Review
Autocrossing the MINI Range


cafepress