mini cooper s eats RCS for breakfast, they say!hehehe
  • Register
  • Help
Results 1 to 24 of 24
  1. #1
    SMP addict pugjet's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Enruoblem
    Posts
    2,098

    Default mini cooper s eats RCS for breakfast, they say!hehehe

    pssst RCS boys,

    someone driving his girlfriend's mini cooper s "ate a RCS for breakfast!" quote unquote, but your RCS can beat a stock ASTRA!

    http://www.nissansilvia.com/forums/i...howtopic=45742

    youd have to scroll to the middle of the page.

    n.b. just happend to click on a link provided by another AFer and had a bit of a doodle.

    what i'd give to own an s13 n/a nissan silvia auto with a veilside kit, flip paint and chrome backbox nicely tilted on an angle.

    Advertisement
    current frogs :
    '94 s3 alpine 205GTi

    daily ding magnet: '98 1.8 16v citroen xsara


    previous frogs:

    88 S1 205GTi
    '95 306S16


    gimme corners. . .


  2. #2
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Hobart, Tasmania
    Posts
    53

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pugjet

    what i'd give to own an s13 n/a nissan silvia auto with a veilside kit, flip paint and chrome backbox nicely tilted on an angle.
    LMAO!! We looked at a Mini C. S before buying our RSC and I can confirm it was a hell of a lot slower in gear [and against the clock after bringing my g-tech on the test drive!!!]
    1999 Seat Cupra 2.0 16v: silly cams, throttle bodies etc (sold... )

    2003 RSC on 17s

    1977 Mk1 Golf 2.0 16v

  3. #3
    1000+ Posts
    Join Date
    Jul 2001
    Location
    Perth, Western Australia
    Posts
    6,248

    Default

    So, tell us more. You test drove a Mini Cooper S using a G-Tech analyser?

  4. #4
    1000+ Posts Shobbz's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Brisbane, Australia
    Posts
    1,284

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cupra_R
    LMAO!! We looked at a Mini C. S before buying our RSC and I can confirm it was a hell of a lot slower in gear [and against the clock after bringing my g-tech on the test drive!!!]
    I rate the astra. Hate the eletronic throttle though.

    shobbz
    Previous
    2005 407 ST Exec
    1975 504 GL

  5. #5
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Hobart, Tasmania
    Posts
    53

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Stuey
    So, tell us more. You test drove a Mini Cooper S using a G-Tech analyser?
    I take it on most test drives if the cars have a few k's on the clock.

    RSC 0-100: 6.9 and 15.1 1/4
    MCS 0-100: 7.5 and 15.7 1/4 and TERRIBLE throttle response
    1999 Seat Cupra 2.0 16v: silly cams, throttle bodies etc (sold... )

    2003 RSC on 17s

    1977 Mk1 Golf 2.0 16v

  6. #6
    1000+ Posts HONG KONG PUGGY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Yarrabilba, Queensland
    Posts
    2,755

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pugjet
    pssst RCS boys,

    someone driving his girlfriend's mini cooper s "ate a RCS for breakfast!" quote unquote, but your RCS can beat a stock ASTRA!

    http://www.nissansilvia.com/forums/i...howtopic=45742

    youd have to scroll to the middle of the page.

    n.b. just happend to click on a link provided by another AFer and had a bit of a doodle.

    what i'd give to own an s13 n/a nissan silvia auto with a veilside kit, flip paint and chrome backbox nicely tilted on an angle.
    There are only 2 things to be taken from this......
    Renault have to look at there marketing and push the RCS a little harder. Even when the car magazines are saying the RCS is a good car, all these car 'know it alls' still bag it 'cause it is a Renault.
    When the first series of the Clio Sport came out in Aus, I think it car magazine did a test of the 'hot' fours. the Clio form memory beat all of them in all catagories except for straight line speed against the WRX....and then it had to be a turbo to do it! .....They did use the bang for your buck win a little, not as much as they should have though.
    Second, the Mini was a S version, helped by the s/charger!.......I don't have the figures here at present, does the Mini have more power/torque than the RCS??.........might have to become a member of that sight and stir the pot.
    Chris

  7. #7
    Fellow Frogger! Reno's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    1,260

    Default

    that thread/article is a classic.

    What are they talking about not a true Type R perfprer though. i have cleaned up 2 DC5 integra's now... they have got nothing :S

    my brother has a Mini Cooper S, clio waxes the pants off it.

  8. #8
    1000+ Posts HONG KONG PUGGY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Yarrabilba, Queensland
    Posts
    2,755

    Default

    That therad sure is a classic....and they say froggers are bad, these guys have rice covered glasses...if it aint jap it don't cut it.....(except for his g/fs mini. )
    The way to go would be to aquire a V6 Clio, make it look like a standard RCS, remove the guards, quiet single exhaust and line up at the fast fours drags... Me thinks they'd soon figure it out...

  9. #9
    Fellow Frogger! nchandler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    650

    Default

    Even S/C, the cooper S still has 122kw vs the clio's 124kw.

    I drove my brothers JCW cooper S, and as nice as a clio is, it wouldn't have a hope in hell of keeping up with it. If you think minis are slow, drive a JCW - this thing [email protected] hammers.

    It'd be a tough choice between a cooper S and clio for me, the minis are so well built, and comfortable next to the clio. However, the clio is a lot more rewarding and communicative than the standard cooper S.

    Different cars. One is an image car, one isn't

    Nick

  10. #10
    1000+ Posts
    Join Date
    Jul 2001
    Location
    Perth, Western Australia
    Posts
    6,248

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Shobbz
    I rate the astra. Hate the eletronic throttle though.

    shobbz
    So do I - so I bought one. Well, my wife did. Throttle's fine on the 1.8...

  11. #11
    who? when? huh? GTI124's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Gordon, NSW
    Posts
    4,527

    Default

    I certainly hope AF doesn't go down the path of noting each other's "wins". It certainly doesn't add any value to the forum.

    I don't think you can seriously state that one of these cars is "better" than the other based on a g-tech reading! They're both in a similar performance category, and have their own unique differences. Must we continually beat our chests and yell from the roof tops saying how great our cars are? Or are the RCS owners wanting to rival the 180 owners in the paranoia stakes?

  12. #12
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Hobart, Tasmania
    Posts
    53

    Default

    I take the g-tech readings with a pinch of salt (although, if you take the time to set it up right, it's always very close to drag strip times in my experience). Anyway, I've had a good drive in a MCS and it is no way quicker than the 172 and combined with lame throttle response and a wasted 6spd 'box (has 5spd equiv. ratios anyway!), SINGLE CAM operating all 16 valves, it's a complete joke. I'd go as far as saying I hated it...The salesman got all cut up when I told him it was gutless but it truly was. 172 Clio is certainly not quick by any means but it's definately better than the MCS, which might have a decent torque spread, but it's so flat that it's actually boring; there's no reward in the top end either, just a dead, single cam rattle and the pathetic wine of an underboosted s/c God, I'm a negative bastard, I know, but the little Cooper just didn't do it for me.
    1999 Seat Cupra 2.0 16v: silly cams, throttle bodies etc (sold... )

    2003 RSC on 17s

    1977 Mk1 Golf 2.0 16v

  13. #13
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Hobart, Tasmania
    Posts
    53

    Default

    P.S. Remember the Cooper is more than 100kg heavier then the Clio aswell - that's a heck of a lot of weight in the supermini market...
    1999 Seat Cupra 2.0 16v: silly cams, throttle bodies etc (sold... )

    2003 RSC on 17s

    1977 Mk1 Golf 2.0 16v

  14. #14
    who? when? huh? GTI124's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Gordon, NSW
    Posts
    4,527

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cupra_R
    I take the g-tech readings with a pinch of salt (although, if you take the time to set it up right, it's always very close to drag strip times in my experience). Anyway, I've had a good drive in a MCS and it is no way quicker than the 172 and combined with lame throttle response and a wasted 6spd 'box (has 5spd equiv. ratios anyway!), SINGLE CAM operating all 16 valves, it's a complete joke. I'd go as far as saying I hated it...The salesman got all cut up when I told him it was gutless but it truly was. 172 Clio is certainly not quick by any means but it's definately better than the MCS, which might have a decent torque spread, but it's so flat that it's actually boring; there's no reward in the top end either, just a dead, single cam rattle and the pathetic wine of an underboosted s/c God, I'm a negative bastard, I know, but the little Cooper just didn't do it for me.
    Yeah, I'm trying to be nice and neutral...but I didn't like it that much either!

  15. #15
    1000+ Posts
    Join Date
    Jul 2001
    Location
    Perth, Western Australia
    Posts
    6,248

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GTI124
    I certainly hope AF doesn't go down the path of noting each other's "wins". It certainly doesn't add any value to the forum.

    I don't think you can seriously state that one of these cars is "better" than the other based on a g-tech reading! They're both in a similar performance category, and have their own unique differences. Must we continually beat our chests and yell from the roof tops saying how great our cars are? Or are the RCS owners wanting to rival the 180 owners in the paranoia stakes?
    Well said. I had to resist posting a seriously derogatory comment yesterday because I wear a particular hat...so thanks; my thoughts exactly. I've said before - just be happy with your choice of car, as I'm sure you are. These guys on the other forums are, IMO, simply envious of the RCS's pedigree and good reviews and are just waiting to bring it down to big note themselves. You guys know you have one of the great sporting cars on the market and should just be quietly happy with this knowledge. Of course, this includes the ST170 .

    As for traffic light drags, I always remember a car I owned at 18, a stock first generation Holden (Izuzu) Gemini . We regularly caned 5 litre SLR Toranas etc. - now if I went on a Torana forum and said this, I'd get laughed off...but it was the driving, not the ultimate performance, that won these contests. And so it could be with the RCS/Cooper S contest.

    Oh, there was also the fantastic flick switch gearchange and thump-strong clutch...

    Cheers guys

    Stuey

  16. #16
    XTC
    XTC is offline
    VIC: a fine driving state XTC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Location Location Location
    Posts
    8,566

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by nchandler
    It'd be a tough choice between a cooper S and clio for me, the minis are so well built, and comfortable next to the clio. However, the clio is a lot more rewarding and communicative than the standard cooper S.
    Different cars. One is an image car, one isn't Nick
    Thrown both sets of keys and told one is yours .. we all know which one people would take ... (OK some people would stick to their guns - but would that change in real life?).

    The MCS is a much better put together car, even if it's slower on the stopwatch.

    - XTC206 -
    You're not fooling everyone, or did you forget? .......




    '02 Peugeot 206 GTi / '07 VW Golf GTI
    Now this is a .sig
    AF'd in PER, MEL, SYD, ADL, CBR

  17. #17
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    melbourne
    Posts
    55

    Default

    If I wanted a trendy pose car I'd take the MCS - I've been in one but not driven one - it did not impress that much - doesn't have the urge the Clio has

    The JCW MCS is a 50 K car then add climate control, auto wipers & lights and zenons & a 6 stacker you'd be close to 60 on the road !!! You could get a really wicked Clio for that sort of money
    I've also heard that the Mini has had quite a few quality prob's too

    I know that I'm happy with the decision I've made and that all that matters
    Road car :03 Monaco Blue RCS
    Which will replace the Datsun 180B SSS track car

  18. #18
    who? when? huh? GTI124's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Gordon, NSW
    Posts
    4,527

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Stuey
    Well said. I had to resist posting a seriously derogatory comment yesterday because I wear a particular hat...so thanks; my thoughts exactly. I've said before - just be happy with your choice of car, as I'm sure you are. These guys on the other forums are, IMO, simply envious of the RCS's pedigree and good reviews and are just waiting to bring it down to big note themselves. You guys know you have one of the great sporting cars on the market and should just be quietly happy with this knowledge. Of course, this includes the ST170 .

    As for traffic light drags, I always remember a car I owned at 18, a stock first generation Holden (Izuzu) Gemini . We regularly caned 5 litre SLR Toranas etc. - now if I went on a Torana forum and said this, I'd get laughed off...but it was the driving, not the ultimate performance, that won these contests. And so it could be with the RCS/Cooper S contest.

    Oh, there was also the fantastic flick switch gearchange and thump-strong clutch...

    Cheers guys

    Stuey
    Thanks Stuey. It's interesting as the RSC is highly revered in Oz and the UK, but the MCS is held on a pedistal in the UK. It's very strange that the press don't feel the same way here. As for the driving experience, from all I've read, you can't judge an MCS on a 10 minute drive, whilst you can with an RSC. They're both wicked cars, but as has been said, the price is a bit excessive.

    I did consider one, but the JCW kit just made the cost prohibitive and I wasn't enthralled with the handling characteristics. It didn't suit what I wanted. It doesn't make it a crap car, though.

  19. #19
    1000+ Posts
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    1,160

    Default

    Pretty much the same thoughts here...

    I'd stick with the RSC (as i did!)...

    The Mini is smaller too, i really dont like the styling (specially the interior!!!), just saw it as another VW Beetle.... a gimick & nothing else, really turned me off

  20. #20
    who? when? huh? GTI124's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Gordon, NSW
    Posts
    4,527

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by nate
    Pretty much the same thoughts here...

    I'd stick with the RSC (as i did!)...

    The Mini is smaller too, i really dont like the styling (specially the interior!!!), just saw it as another VW Beetle.... a gimick & nothing else, really turned me off
    Erm, I wouldn't say the Cooper S is a gimmick. Sure the styling is a bit retro, but comapring to the Beetle is a bit unfair. The Beetle was nothing more than a Golf, with a worse interior. Why get it over a Golf? The Mini is a standalone car and is a pretty good package.

    I'm sure many of you will change your mind when the Peugeot 180 engine is dropped into the thing in the next 18 months or so.

  21. #21
    1000+ Posts
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    1,160

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GTI124
    Erm, I wouldn't say the Cooper S is a gimmick. Sure the styling is a bit retro, but comapring to the Beetle is a bit unfair. The Beetle was nothing more than a Golf, with a worse interior. Why get it over a Golf?

    I'm sure many of you will change your mind when the Peugeot 180 engine is dropped into the thing in the next 18 months or so.
    I would...

    Bettle is also made in Mexico from what i rememeber, whereas the Golf was still made in Germany... something else to consider between the two!

    180 Motor... hmmm I dont think it lacks power, just handling & features... plus the $ is waaay too much!

  22. #22
    1000+ Posts brenno's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2000
    Location
    2035
    Posts
    1,937

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GTI124
    As for the driving experience, from all I've read, you can't judge an MCS on a 10 minute drive, whilst you can with an RSC.
    Not sure I can agree with that Linc. My brief test drives in an RCS didn't satisfy me. I couldn't get the feel of the car.

    So when a mate offered me his car recently, I thought I could understand it a bit more. I drove it out to Eastern Creek in it, won a motorkhana in it *gloat*, drove it around some known roads. On the weekend I drove up to Brooklyn and back in it. Nup, I still can't work it out. It doesn't gel. Great motor, not sure about the rest.

  23. #23
    who? when? huh? GTI124's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Gordon, NSW
    Posts
    4,527

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by nate
    I would...

    Bettle is also made in Mexico from what i rememeber, whereas the Golf was still made in Germany... something else to consider between the two!

    180 Motor... hmmm I dont think it lacks power, just handling & features... plus the $ is waaay too much!
    I think it lacked poke, myself. The NA 180 engine should make for a nice change in responsiveness and handling.

  24. #24
    who? when? huh? GTI124's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Gordon, NSW
    Posts
    4,527

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by macquered
    Not sure I can agree with that Linc. My brief test drives in an RCS didn't satisfy me. I couldn't get the feel of the car.

    So when a mate offered me his car recently, I thought I could understand it a bit more. I drove it out to Eastern Creek in it, won a motorkhana in it *gloat*, drove it around some known roads. On the weekend I drove up to Brooklyn and back in it. Nup, I still can't work it out. It doesn't gel. Great motor, not sure about the rest.
    What I mean is the RSC makes a pretty good first impression in the driving stakes, the Mini takes a bit more time. Initially the MCS is underwhleming, whilst the RSC at least has a mountain of torque.

    It doesn't mean I think the RSC will satisfy everyone immediately. I mean that compared to an MCS it makes more of an impact.

    I'm of a similar opinion to you on the RCS though, as you know.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •