We’ve seen R56 specifications on both sides of the Atlantic but one thing we haven’t seen yet is the official Cooper S power graph. Until now. Check out the scan of the official MINI document that just showed up in our inbox.
Thanks to frequent MF contributor Eric Kennedy for the cleaned up (and English) versions.
Hmm, so the torque tapers off even though the power pretty much just keeps going up?
Granted, it’s nice to see how quick those yellow lines shoot up there- the new engine obviously pulls pretty hard, and slightly harder under overboost.
Looks like I’ve found the perfect shift points for my new baby… :o)
Ok, it’s been a while since I’ve done physics but something doesn’t make sense.
Between 4500 and 5000 RPM, with overboost on, the torque declines but it is still always above 240Nm.
So how can the rate of increase of power (ie the gradient) be shallower during overboost when the torque being pumped out during this period is always greater than 240Nm?
Basically, I don’t see how the torque curve can explain the overboost power graph ‘rejoining’ the normal curve?
Just as the torque curve rejoins at 5000rpm so must the HP curve. You can’t have a different HP for the same torque. Note that this is not a continuous plot but is made of straight lines between points.
I remember seeing the power curves for the Cooper and S in a technical document somewhere, that looks like the same graph for the S I saw not too long ago.
—>Almighty God [lol]
The numbers all check out. The equation to get power from torque and RPM is easy:
HP = [LbFt*RPM]/5252
If the graph was on a traditional HP and Lb-Ft scale, you’d see the plots cross each other at 5252 RPM.
—>bad ess: Overboost is an ECU controlled function where additional boost pressure from the turbo is temporarily allowed for a short time [while overtaking in traffic]
Ryephile – So to get “Overboost” do you have to literally floor it or does the ECU give the power when you just stab the gas hard? I checked the “In Depth” article but couldn’t find anything conclusive on that point.
Thanks for posting Gabe!
To address the question before it comes up. I’m not exactly sure why the power (hp) and torque (lb-ft) don’t cross at 5252 rpm as Ryephile said.
I think it’s a combination of the nice looking plot that MINI releases being a bit more linear than it actually is, and me trying to pluck the numbers off the plot that was originally posted. The numbers check out though…
Peak hp 172 hp, peak torque 177 lb-ft
Overboost 172 hp, overboost torque 192 lb-ft
—>Josh: I would deduce that Overboost would be strictly at W.O.T. [wide open throttle] when the ECU sees the engine under full load. Beyond that, I’m not sure how often or for how long the ECU allows Overboost. The ECU isn’t going to provide Overboost at part-throttle because the driver isn’t asking for that much torque.
—>Kennedy: I’d have to get deeper into the equation, but the 5252 RPM crossing is just a function of the equation and the units being used. Also, I doubt a real dyno plot would look that “calculated” and will have little ripples and arcs showing imperfections in the boost controller and volumetric efficiency.
<blockquote>The torque and HP curve will only cross at 5252 when using the same scale for both numbers.</blockquote>
Holy cow, what a brilliant concept. Of course you’re right… Geez, thanks!
<blockquote>the 5252 RPM crossing is just a function of the equation and the units being used</blockquote>
Very true too. iNomis got it straightened out. If it were kW and Nm, it crosses somewhere around 7200-ish rpm, I forget exactly. I checked that this morning trying to figure out what i screwed up… when in fact I was just being an idiot! 🙂
<blockquote>AFAIK where the graphs “cross†is meaningless. It is much more useful to compare points on the graph to gear/final drive ratios</blockquote>
It’s meaningless unless you want to check your math!
What happened to the concept of a high-revving engine to go with a quick and nimble sports car? Based on those graphs, looks like the optimal shift points for the R56 will be below 6K RPM…how inspiring.
I have driven the R56 S and woot! It “feels” much stronger than the r53. The dyno just proves it =)
Anyway for 90% of the people the broad fat powerband is going to be highly appreciated.
<blockquote>What happened to the concept of a high-revving engine to go with a quick and nimble sports car? Based on those graphs, looks like the optimal shift points for the R56 will be below 6K RPM…how inspiring.</blockquote>
Did MINI’s concept EVER include a really high revving engine? It IS a quick and nimble sporty car. You just don’t need to spin the engine turbine quick to go fast.
you want high revs buy an s2000 and drive around revving above 6.5k just to HAVE any power. Might be appealing to you, but I don’t want to sound like a ricer driving around town. With the r56’s torque curve you don’t NEED the revs. It’s power is all on tap even down low.
Hold criticism until you’ve driven it. I found it to be much better than the higher revving r53.
The dyno runs appear to be some sort of testing agency and they do not appear to include the R56 overboost. I’m not sure how that would be done as there is no user switch to turn it off that I know of. I suppose this may be some kind of certification test?
Hmm, so the torque tapers off even though the power pretty much just keeps going up?
Granted, it’s nice to see how quick those yellow lines shoot up there- the new engine obviously pulls pretty hard, and slightly harder under overboost.
Looks like I’ve found the perfect shift points for my new baby… :o)
I can hear the sound of “the tuners” wondering what that yellow torque curve could look like with a bit of reprogramming…
Looks like more peak HP is going to be hard to come by with that turbo.
What is over boost? A locked waste gate or is it a fuel delivery blip on WOT?
Ok, it’s been a while since I’ve done physics but something doesn’t make sense.
Between 4500 and 5000 RPM, with overboost on, the torque declines but it is still always above 240Nm.
So how can the rate of increase of power (ie the gradient) be shallower during overboost when the torque being pumped out during this period is always greater than 240Nm?
Basically, I don’t see how the torque curve can explain the overboost power graph ‘rejoining’ the normal curve?
Just as the torque curve rejoins at 5000rpm so must the HP curve. You can’t have a different HP for the same torque. Note that this is not a continuous plot but is made of straight lines between points.
I remember seeing the power curves for the Cooper and S in a technical document somewhere, that looks like the same graph for the S I saw not too long ago.
—>Almighty God [lol]
The numbers all check out. The equation to get power from torque and RPM is easy:
HP = [LbFt*RPM]/5252
If the graph was on a traditional HP and Lb-Ft scale, you’d see the plots cross each other at 5252 RPM.
—>bad ess: Overboost is an ECU controlled function where additional boost pressure from the turbo is temporarily allowed for a short time [while overtaking in traffic]
Ryephile – So to get “Overboost” do you have to literally floor it or does the ECU give the power when you just stab the gas hard? I checked the “In Depth” article but couldn’t find anything conclusive on that point.
Thanks,
Josh
Thanks for posting Gabe!
To address the question before it comes up. I’m not exactly sure why the power (hp) and torque (lb-ft) don’t cross at 5252 rpm as Ryephile said.
I think it’s a combination of the nice looking plot that MINI releases being a bit more linear than it actually is, and me trying to pluck the numbers off the plot that was originally posted. The numbers check out though…
Peak hp 172 hp, peak torque 177 lb-ft
Overboost 172 hp, overboost torque 192 lb-ft
—>Josh: I would deduce that Overboost would be strictly at W.O.T. [wide open throttle] when the ECU sees the engine under full load. Beyond that, I’m not sure how often or for how long the ECU allows Overboost. The ECU isn’t going to provide Overboost at part-throttle because the driver isn’t asking for that much torque.
—>Kennedy: I’d have to get deeper into the equation, but the 5252 RPM crossing is just a function of the equation and the units being used. Also, I doubt a real dyno plot would look that “calculated” and will have little ripples and arcs showing imperfections in the boost controller and volumetric efficiency.
I hope that helps,
Ryan
The torque and HP curve will only cross at 5252 when using the same scale for both numbers.
Does anyone have a link to the power graph for the R53?
I’d be interested in a side-by-side comparison.
<a href="http://www.northamericanmotoring.com/forums/showthread.php?t=92143" rel="nofollow">R53 vs R56 dyno graphs</a>
<blockquote>The torque and HP curve will only cross at 5252 when using the same scale for both numbers.</blockquote>
Holy cow, what a brilliant concept. Of course you’re right… Geez, thanks!
<blockquote>the 5252 RPM crossing is just a function of the equation and the units being used</blockquote>
Very true too. iNomis got it straightened out. If it were kW and Nm, it crosses somewhere around 7200-ish rpm, I forget exactly. I checked that this morning trying to figure out what i screwed up… when in fact I was just being an idiot! 🙂
AFAIK where the graphs “cross” is meaningless. It is much more useful to compare points on the graph to gear/final drive ratios.
Dave, thanks for the link. That’s quite a difference in the torque curves.
<blockquote>AFAIK where the graphs “cross†is meaningless. It is much more useful to compare points on the graph to gear/final drive ratios</blockquote>
It’s meaningless unless you want to check your math!
What happened to the concept of a high-revving engine to go with a quick and nimble sports car? Based on those graphs, looks like the optimal shift points for the R56 will be below 6K RPM…how inspiring.
So..how long before a tuner will chip it to be in “overboost” all the time? 🙂
I have driven the R56 S and woot! It “feels” much stronger than the r53. The dyno just proves it =)
Anyway for 90% of the people the broad fat powerband is going to be highly appreciated.
<blockquote>What happened to the concept of a high-revving engine to go with a quick and nimble sports car? Based on those graphs, looks like the optimal shift points for the R56 will be below 6K RPM…how inspiring.</blockquote>
Did MINI’s concept EVER include a really high revving engine? It IS a quick and nimble sporty car. You just don’t need to spin the engine turbine quick to go fast.
you want high revs buy an s2000 and drive around revving above 6.5k just to HAVE any power. Might be appealing to you, but I don’t want to sound like a ricer driving around town. With the r56’s torque curve you don’t NEED the revs. It’s power is all on tap even down low.
Hold criticism until you’ve driven it. I found it to be much better than the higher revving r53.
Who was it that said Horsepower sells cars, torque wins races?
My q is: why is the torque line flat? Can that be changed?
<blockquote>My q is: why is the torque line flat? Can that be changed?</blockquote>
My guess is to increase reliability by limiting stresses on driveline components.
I think we need R56 to be independently dynoed as these graphs look like typical marketing material.
>I think we need R56 to be independently dynoed as these graphs look like typical marketing material.
It was already done and <a href="http://motoringfile.com/2007/02/14/2007-cooper-s-power-curve-graph/#comment-96958" rel="nofollow">linked in Dave’s comment</a> above. And yes they check out as correct.
The dyno runs appear to be some sort of testing agency and they do not appear to include the R56 overboost. I’m not sure how that would be done as there is no user switch to turn it off that I know of. I suppose this may be some kind of certification test?
Should have said the dyno runs Dave linked to comparing the R53 and R56.