You know the story is getting juicy when major US automotive publications start to cover it. Autoweek has a nice recap of what we know so far on the next generation MINI… the R56. While there's really nothing new here that hasn't already been seen on MotoringFile or MINI2, it's certainly worth the read. Here's an excerpt:
When BMW reintroduced the Mini to the United States in 2002, it got just about everything right-except, maybe, the engines.
The German producer of the quintessential Brit driving machine will fix that when the next-generation Mini debuts in early 2007 with a new range of all-aluminum, twin-cam engines that BMW will build in partnership with French carmaker Peugeot. The new powerplants include two turbocharged units that will replace the normally aspirated and supercharged four-cylinder 1.6-liter engines in the current Cooper and Cooper S.
The new Mini, dubbed Mini 2 by some, will stick with the same four-cylinder 1.6-liter capacity, but the BMW design will be a higher-tech mill than today's iron-block Tritec engine, which was designed in double-quick time by Chrysler.
The engine will come in four power outputs: 75 hp, 115 hp, 143 hp and 170 hp. The 75 and 115 outputs are normally aspirated, while the 143 and 170 outputs are turbocharged and intercooled. Fortunately, the Mini won't get the 75-hp unit; that is reserved for Peugeot.
The two turbo units mark a major change for the two best-loved Mini models, the Cooper and Cooper S. The Cooper will get a major power hike to 143 hp from today's 115-hp engine. While the power output of the S stays at 170 hp, the turbo-charged engine promises a big improvement in driveability and power delivery over the current supercharged setup.
Mini may pull one more trick as well. AutoWeek sources say BMW is considering sticking with a low-power Cooper model with the 115-hp non-turbo engine, which would provide two Cooper engine options, and one Cooper S engine.
All engines get variable valve timing and other controls inspired by BMW's six-cylinder engines, with the turbo units featuring common-rail direct-injection fuel delivery and twin-scroll turbos.
Otherwise, the new Mini sees few engineering changes under its revised sheetmetal. The new body will clothe a carryover platform in which key dimensions increase by a few millimeters only, while the go-kart handling will remain a key feature of the replacement.
Read the rest:
[ Mini 2: BMW's sequel goes turbo; next-gen model to make early '07 debut ]
[Photo via Autoweek]
<p>Hummm, I wonder, could MINI be looking to make a bigger distinction between the MINI One and the MINI Cooper?</p>
<p>Example:
MINI One = 115HP
MINI Cooper = 143H
MINI CooperS = 170HP</p>
<p>What do you think?</p>
<p>“the turboÂÂcharged engine promises a big improvement in driveability and power delivery over the current supercharged setup.”</p>
<p>??? If anything the opposite is true, with most turbo engines having a lack of power then a sudden spool-up.</p>
<p>They fail to mention the real benefits such as the variable timing. If not giving more power then they should bring better economy.</p>
<p>so is the 140 HP engine turbo'd???</p>
<p>Cooper getting a Turbo? Isn't this the first time we've heard this?</p>
<p>If the Cooper is going to get bigger/heavier it will need more HP just to keep performance the same as the current.</p>
<p>This extra HP would surely be needed if Mini brings out an even larger 5-door Hatch.</p>
<p>Since they are switching to turbos, shouldn't they rename the MINI Cooper S to the MINI Cooper T? :)</p>
<p>No, because the “S” does not stand for supercharged, all Mini owners should know that.</p>
<p>This article has given me the most promising news about the new MINI. It sounds like they are working on another winner.</p>
<p>For a while there, I thought I was going to have to make the cutoff date to order the current MINI.</p>
<p>The part about the twin headlights makes me wonder if the folks at BMW read the MINI internet sites.</p>
<p>So when the artice says “EARLY 2007 debut” , does that mean it will be launched in the actual year “2007” or that the “2007-model” will get a “early launch in 2006”?</p>
<p>Seems to me the BMW 1-series is the MINI's best friend. It keeps the hp, drive system, size, and price from blowing beyond the original mini concept. Thank goodness.</p>
<p>A very intelligent uncle of mine once said…</p>
<p>“After all is said and done, there's more said than done!”</p>
<p>I'll just wait for the roll out…all this speculation and blustering gets old.</p>
<p><em>*</em>RB</p>
<p>Yes Ryan this is the first we have heard of this. This is huge news. Turbo Cooper. I'm glad I waited on my 2005 purchase. I'll wait until 2007 and order a Turbo MC!</p>
<p>Guys – This has all been covered in great detail on MotoringFile last week:</p>
<p><a href="https://www.motoringfile.com/2004/12/14/new_mini_38_psa_engine_range_in_detail">New MINI & PSA Engine Range in Detail</a></p>
<p><a href="https://www.motoringfile.com/2004/12/13/bmw_38_peugeot_announce_new_engine_range">BMW & Peugoet Announce New Engine Range</a></p>
<p>BTW for all sorts of next generation MINI info click on the R56 link in the first paragraph. We've posted a ton of it over the past two years.</p>
<p>I don't know if I'm alone here but one of the charms of the “S” is the sound of the blower. Change that to a turbo and it will sound like all of the other ricers out there.</p>
<p>As the saying go “Turbo charging is nice but I would rather be blown”</p>
<p>Cheers,
Jack</p>
<p>I disagree that a turbo will make the MINI sound like a “ricer.” The exhaust system is what makes the “ricer” sound ricey. There are many turbo cars out there that are fast, quiet, and civil. To label all turbos as “ricers” is idiotic.</p>
<p>I wonder if the new engine will allow a engine “swap” to the older chassis. There were some success stories in the BMW world, M3 engine in 318ti, etc. That would be interesting to see….</p>
<p>It is amazing all of the people who are no tearing apart the current engine, when only a few years ago it was praised. More techno gizmo's do not necessarily make a better engine. I am sure it will be a good engine, but in my mind there was nothing wrong with the current engine. The real testament for an engine is it's efficiency and reliability. While this engine is not the most efficient (it isn't so bad), it is very reliable.</p>
<p>I agree with Bucky. Turbo and ricer are two completely different things. Ricer is tacky plastic crap (in primer)you bolt to your car and an exhaust that is loud and annoying, but makes no more power than the stock. And don't forget the giant wing that ADDS lift to the rear of the car.</p>
<p>Before the MINI, my wife and I were a two turbo household. I don't think anyone in their right mind would call a VW Passat or a Saab 9-3 ricer.</p>
<p>I must agree somewhat with dgszweda. I would wait at least a year or two after initial production of this new engine before I would buy it. I know some of you disagree with the “lets get the bugs out first, theory”. I can tell you though, from working in the engineering field for many years, that you can engineer and design the heck out of something but you never really know how it will work until you put it to use in the real world. I don't know a lot about engines but I would think that things like road conditions, driving styles and climate would affect the way an engine preforms or does not preform. It will take a little time for some things to become manifest. I sure that BMW does a lot of testing though. Knowing BMW's passion for perfection though, I believe any bugs will be minimal.</p>
<p>Consider that this engine will have been in PSA cars for well over a year before they go into the MINI.</p>
<p>Also consider BMW's track record with recent cars and first year bugs. The only major ones I know about (except maybe the whole M3 engine thing) has been software issues. Of course that's not to say there definitely won't be any… but I'm personally not too concerned.</p>
<p>i think one of the things they need to keep with the “S” is the hood scoop. it adds so much character to the car and allows the average joe to realize what kind of MINI is about to pass his SUV. it needs to stay functional tho, none of the last generation Mustang fake scoop stuff.</p>
<p>I tend to agree with Gabe and the others who are not concerned with a first year run of an engine, model, etc. That is with a BMW product anyway. From a testing perspective, I am sold when it comes to BMW products….</p>
<p>I remember a few years back when a friend of mine bought his first BMW (on his third now), they (BMW) sent a documentary-like video/DVD that went through the production facilities, etc. Granted it was put out by the marketing department, so I did take it with a grain of salt to a degree. But one thing that stood out then in that video and still sticks in my tiny little brain is that they test the seat belts for wear and tear, etc. But, the Type A's over there at BMW test all the different colors of the seatbelts in case the dye that is used or anything else that is used to modify its color will make a difference in its performance over another color.</p>
<p>Now that is attention to detail to the Nth degree.</p>
<p>Maybe I am naive, but I thought that was pretty cool and I personally would have no worries buying the first year of anything BMW. :o)</p>
<p>BMW is known for being incredibly precision oriented. Granted they're cars aren't perfect. I've had four of them and know their faults well. However I also know their engineers are special people that create special products. I have no doubt these engines will make believers out of all of us.</p>
<p>From what I've heard from someone who's familiar with the project within BMW the new engines will be lighter, faster revving, and have lots of tuning potential. Now add more effeciency and you've got a real winner.</p>
<p>Being ignorant regarding the “twin-scroll” turbo advantage, I did a little bit of research.</p>
<p>It appears that the folks at Garrett Engine Boosting Systems not only have a twin-scroll turbo but a variable vane (pitch) turbine design. Both designs specifically address the turbo lag issue.</p>
<p>The twin-scroll design (MINI) reduces the size of the exhaust gas inlet under low rpm conditions, thereby increasing flow pressure to the turbine to spin it up faster. The variable vane design allows the vanes of the turbine to rotate, adjusting the “pitch” of each vane (similar to an airplane's propeller). Thus, under low rpm conditions the pitch increases to spin-up the turbine faster.</p>
<p>I believe the twin-scroll turbo is used on the WRX STi and the Mits Lancer Evo. The variable vane design is currently used by BMW for its 740D.</p>
<p>An interesting PR piece that adds detail to this amateur overview can be found at:</p>
<p><a href="http://www.autofieldguide.com/articles/050103.html" rel="nofollow ugc">http://www.autofieldguide.com/articles/050103.html</a></p>
<p>FWIW,</p>
<p>Theo</p>
<p>I don't know about this……?
I am not going to get into the “turbo vs. SC” thing, but I have to say that “Turbo MINI” just doesn't sound right. Best bet is to just wait and see.</p>
<p>Good summary, Theo. The US market STi does not use a twin-scroll turbo, but the Japanese domestic market version does. </p>
<p>Also: If they had read the technical articles in detail, they would have seen that the turbocharged powerplants will not use variable valve timing. That feature is reserved for the naturally aspirated versions of “The Prince”. ;)</p>
<p>I wasn’t talking about the sound of the exhaust. To me there is no better motoring music than the whine of the supercharger especially when the air box has been opened up. Yes a turbo is quiet and with the right parts you can hear the hiss of the waste gate (aka the ricer sound). I’m not saying that a turbo will make a MINI a ricer I prefer the sound of a screaming supercharger.</p>
<p>Cheers,
Jack</p>
<p>I'm not trying to sound like the guys that is trying to ignore the new car smell because he just bought a 2004, but… </p>
<p>Still, I am on board with Jack07732 on this. The current version isn't perfect, it's a rough ride with a whiny engine and a bunch of little nuances that most would rather do without.</p>
<p>I am still inclinded to hold onto this car for a good while, regardless of whether or not the new car is better in terms of build, ect… </p>
<p>I like the fact that the current MINI is series of happy mistakes (not really), but it gives me that feeling. The MINI has a unique, classic feel, which no other car I've driven has, and whether the new MINI coming in the next years still retains that feel, or it gets more bland by a streamlined production or borrowing parts from the BMW product lines, who knows. </p>
<p>I just dig the fact that the supercharger is the engine noise, that people get motion sick easily, that bumps hurt, the interior is cheap, but well designed, runflats suck, I love it all. </p>
<p>What a rant.</p>
<p>Still excited to see what is coming down the pipe.</p>
<p>I realize this has been covered before. I just read over or missed the part about the regular MC being turbo as well. I guess I was confused as to which car was getting which engine. Then autoweek comes along and writes the article in fifth grade english so I can understand! 🙂 I wonder how easy it would be to make the MC have the same HP as the MCS. Just a chip change?</p>
<p>BMW is well-known for first model year problems. The '02 MINIs, the mid '90s V8 engines and the M42 profile gasket come immediately to mind. So you won't find me rushing out to buy an '07 model. </p>
<p>If you add the miserable experience of owning an '85 Peugeot to the mix (which my family did), you have a prospect of me keeping this car for a long time.</p>
<p>OK.. Please tell me that the Hood Scoop is NOT going away!</p>
<p>In all fairness, the '02 MINI issues revolved around the engine management controlling software and some build quality problems expected on what was then a totally brand new car for BMW.</p>
<p>The hardware (Engine/Transmission) has been virtually bulletproof. The TRITEC engine have proven time and time again that they can take abuse from turners/auto-Xers and in day to day operation, these engines don't quit.</p>
<p>For first year models, I trust BMW in getting most of the hardware right, I just don't trust them when it comes to the electronics. Most of us agree that the software code released on the 2002 and some 2003 MINI production should have never ever gone out the door the way it did. The Siemens software fiasco is still alive and well with us today (erratic idle, hard cold starts, etc) but these are not related to the Chrysler hardware under the bonnet, rather to complete mis-management in part of BMW and Siemens' complete and utter reluctance to share the code so others can finally once and for all fix it!!!.</p>
<p>I am for progress and evolution and hope that the Prince engines can deliver in all aspects of the equation. I still contend the TRITEC powerplants are mighty good engines whose only sins (apparently) are the Brazil-Detroit connection, the simplicity in its design, the bulletproof reliability and the fact that they are made by BMW's archrival, Daimler-Chrysler.</p>
<p>No Japanese sub 2.0L engine I have driven in recent years has the torque and oomph of the TRITECS.</p>
<p>BMW needs to pay CLOSE attention to the engine management software, whether it is a TRITEC equipped MINI or a PSA-“Prince” equipped MINI. What killed the MINI for many people were the constant and ongoing ECU software related troubles and this is unexcusable from any perspective.</p>
<p>Your right Frank, software issues can be a major pain. To be fair, BMW is not the only automaker to have these problems though. I believe even Benz has had some software issues in the past. Most auto repair guys these days almost have to have a BS in computer programming just to fix cars.</p>
<p>I couldn't have said it any better Frank.</p>
<p>Maybe we can hope that Apple computer can can partner with BMW on new and more reliable software-code for future BMW's and Mini's</p>
<p>We all know the BMW can sure learn a thing or two to improve the interface of their idrive.</p>
<p>I forgot to add I agree with those comments above about the rock-solid reliability of the Tri-tec engines. The fact that the tri-tec has an “iron block” almost guarantees its durability over the years. </p>
<p>While an iron block engine might be heavier and preceived as archaic they sure are tougher and really the only weak link on the Mini's will stem for the reliability issues of its electronics and software.</p>
<p>Have all the 2002 and 2003 software issues been resolved yet or are owner still plagued with software problems to this day????</p>
<p>I want some of what you folks are smoking who are not worried about the reliablity of a 1st-year BMW redesign. The reliability track record of every major BMW redesign in the last ten years (3-series, 5-series, 7-series, Z3, Z4, X5, X3) has been absymal for a year or two. I love BMWs, but they are always glitchy in the 1st year. Always.</p>
<p>To BMWs credit, they stand behind them and fix them, but it can be very aggravating.</p>
<p>I'll take a “wait and see” attitude on this new engine. If you need a new car, I certainly wouldn't postpone a purchase because of this. On the surface we look like we're getting the same performance with a turbo instead of a supercharger with little change otherwise – doesn't seem like a huge step forward to me. We just need to wait and see.</p>
<p>Personally, I think the existing engines leave big shoes to fill. They are robust and charismatic – a big part of the car's success. The only thing I can seriously fault is fuel efficiency where the new engine will do better – it can't do much worse.</p>
<p>i dont get it. change the recent 170hp supercharged S to a 170 hp turbocharged one. the supercharger is what makes the S and “S”. they should make the cooper a turbo, and leave the s supercharged. turbos are a big waste of time. a mini is different because of its supercharger. “turbo schmurbo” remember?</p>
<p>IF Mini does enter WRC in 2007/08 with a larger 5-door AWD Cooper S it will need a TURBO just to be able to compete.</p>
<p>I like that BMW denies that it is going to a twin-headlight design… the classic design would be ruined.</p>
<p>I recently read an article that the current Mini cost as much to produce (per car) as the Volkswagon Passat. The problem is that BMW is considering detuning the current suspension setup to strengthen profits on what has been a losing proposition relative to the rest of the BMW lineup. BMW is ultra profit-centric.
I think the best thing of all would be to have the previous generation Mini equipped with a Haybusa powerplant. The friggin thing would rock and still maintain similar handling characteristics of the 60 horse slowpoke. All this and a little nostalgia to boot. -N8</p>
<p>What’s the world coming to a MINI with a French engine?
That’s a slap in the face to everything that was once British. I am toughly disgusted with BMW for allowing even a concept of this car to be made. Turbo or not the idea of using a Citroen/Peugeot engine is yet another slap in the face to the car that was to be designed after classic mini. What’s next, French issue headlamps!!!! (Still upset about the Monte Carlo rally upset in 1966.) This is truly a sad day for mini owners.</p>
<p>You should do a bit more research before posting such strong worded comments. BMW designed the engine in Germany and it will be built in England for the MINI. BMW is partnering with PSA mainly for help with logistics and for better economies of scale. This will be a complex and expensive engine, the more they make the less it will cost. This will be a German engineered engine built in the UK.</p>
<p>the engine is still designed with PSA no matter where they manfacture it. thats a nice thought and all, it being mainly designed in germany, but the fact is that PSA has a large say in how it is designed. I guess I better stick to the classics until BMW gets thier heads out of thier rear ends. if its anything like other PSA engins it wont hold up.</p>
<p>Whatever makes you feel better I suppose. The fact of the matter remains that it was designed and engineered almost entirely by BMW. Considering the current car’s engine was designed and engineered in Detroit by Chrysler… I’d say this is a nice step up. </p>
<p>But you’re right… you should stick with those classics. God forbid anything on your car is from France.</p>