I know that the rear spoiler was stated to be functional. It surprises me that its functionality includes top speed. It seems that, with its size, the drag it causes might out weigh any speed gain and that it would be more for cutting lift and keeping the rear wheels on the ground. BMW/MINI must have really done their homework on this one.

An auspicious number....

So we’ll get a full review in about 3 months? In the “as delivered” condition?

 

the custom foil is ordered - 9x17 at hand 1oo kg off most likely in swapping parts, quote for 4WD swap still outstanding
seat delete around 50 kgs.

https://de-de.facebook.com/f56.shiva...type=3&theater

 

So, these are your plans for your GP3? Including an “All4 swap”? Then we will definitely need a before and after test of it if that is the case...

 

The only thing that appeals to me about the new GP is the engine. Does anybody remember the Pontiac Trans Am's of the 70's and 80's with all that extra plastic stuck on to try and make it look cool? ​It didn't work for me then....and it doesn't work for me now.

 

You can have the same engine and performance with the BMW M135I without the ugly bits and add ons of the Mini GP3.

 

Sincere questions, that are not intended as an attack on your reasons for purchase not the integrity of the GP3.
What would lead you to believe these two statements?

Is the Track width of the hubs Wider, or does that come from the wheels?

Is the downforce of the rear wing actually more than the JCW model? And, if this is true, where does that make the most difference in the operation of the car?

Can this improve the handling on normal highways below 80mph/130kmh?



....



.

 

Which is why I'm looking forward to a formidable release of the JCW with 6sp in 2020/21... the aftermarket will bring this engine to more than the 301hp easily.

I still like the Form of the MINI over even the 1M's... Wish we could get an AUDI A1RS... Yaris GS.... or the AMG A45 here




.

 

The fender flares cover the wider track of the M135i F40 - the wing stabilize the rear of the car at high speed, you don't wont to rock up that at top speed!

to improve the handling on normal highways below 80mph/130kmh, you would need a real WRC downforce double wing, with the respective front and areo shaped floor ;-)

 

So, that I have it clear, you are saying that the GP3 has a completely different a-arm and hub assembly that is further spaced out than the JCW variant?

The GP3 Wheels are the same width and offset as the JCW and a special factory wider fron/reart suspension accounts for wider track of 1.5" ??

So, for racing the rear GP3 wing makes a difference... but on the street, no so much?


.

 

From the BMW press release "Newly designed swivel bearings enable increased camber levels on the front wheels" Full release Here.

In official MINI video at 7.40 he clearly mentions "special suspension settings to allow you to adjust things like camber and track width"

All of the above I guess can be taken with a grain or two of salt as we have not seen complete and final specs yet, however I would guess most if not all the GP suspension parts will be different to the JCW. Just my take on what we know so far

 

If MINI DID offer a Manual-6-Speed, 301HP engined, JCW 3-door Hardtop version next to the GP... even at the same price... It would be an easy decision for me.

Now dress that in Ice-Blue with Orange roof and mirror caps, and the ALL4 suspension... OTT WINNER !!


Poking around the internet this morning randomly.... one of the brit sites said that the wheels have an ET30 on GP3.... which would account for the added track width mentioned above...so I doubt that MINI issued an entire new Trailing arm(rear), A-arm and knuckle etc up front... the wider stance, IMHO, would be wheels offset and wheel/tire-width only.

I believe that this car will be wearing 225/35R18 Hankook Ventus S1 Evo Z tires on 8.5x18 ET 30 wheels?
Slightly smaller O.D. than the other cars at 225/40R18
Any better intel out there for production models? I don't even see those on Hankook's website... treadwear of 200... must be pretty sticky

"Swivel bearings" sound like adjustable upper camber plates ... maybe we get treated to Factory installed Vorschlag or K-Mac units in the GP3?

As Rich said above... the rear wing would seem to add drag if anything.... that drag is what translates into downforce. I doubt that the wing 'adds' any top speed... downforce on a fast long sweeper... but with only FWD... no drive-wheel traction improvement however.... It looks interesting... but a little overdone for MY tastes on a hot hatch.




Track width on the rear... I would imagine can be done if you would have both upper and lower adjustable control arms.


Looks like a great car.... eager to see what the customers do with them !





.

 

Has anyone else noticed that with all this fancy talk about the GP3 having special offset wheels, sticky tires, swivel suspension bearings, etc, etc, etc.....and Mini neglected to put a set of hi-performance rotors on the car. What's with that?

 

Not sure what a “hi-performance” rotor would look like. In actuality the GP rotors are just fine. It is the rotor’s mass that counts with braking. Then there are the vanes to cool them. If the rotors on the GP are 30mm thick, like the JCW rotors, they will have plenty of cooling. And being that the car is lighter than the JCW and the rotors are larger in diameter than the JCW’s, they are “hi-performance” enough. Cross-drilled and slots don’t buy you any “performance” over what is there. That stuff just looks “cool”.

 

I can see the point about the the non slotted and/or drilled rotors..

I see true high perf cars like the GT-2 RS, Top BMW/AUDI/AMG cars with vented and/or slotted rotors... Seems a waste if that is purely cosmetic?






.

 

My cousin’s M2 has drilled rotors.

From what I understand and the little experience I have with slotted brakes, the answer is that those features can serve a purpose. But likely only a purpose on a 24 hr endurance race car or the like...

My own experience out on the track is from a multitude of cooked brake parts resulting from BMW/MINI using the front brakes instead of a mechanical LSD to control front wheel spin. I now have this somewhat under control having gone to a mechanical LSD and a custom Wilwood BBK. I have used plain faced rotors as well as slotted. My feeling is that slitted rotors give a bit better feel (solid feel) to the brakes. The actual stopping power is no different.

I also had a chance to have a chance to talk to Bill Hawe,
about a number of things about his beautiful 962 Porsche race car, including why the car has drilled rotors.

I had always been told cross-drilled rotor don’t do anything and the rotors will crack (fail) prematurely as compared to non-drilled rotors. Don’t bother with them. So, why use them on that race car? I was told “all rotors will crack” and why cross-drilled “brake pedal feel”. He had tried slotted rotors but they were not as good. I can imagine on a car that is designed to go for 24 hrs flat out and it is being driven at 99+% almost the whole time, this is important.

I have also read that cross-drilling improves cooling. I don’t know the basis for this claim. On a car without forced ducting directly into the vanes of the brake rotors, as the 962 has, I would guess this would be a marginal affect on cooling.

If you watch the IMSA races , as I have, I have not seen cross-drilled rotors on cars with steel rotors. I can not say that I have inspected every car, but the ones that I have notice the brakes on, they are only slotted.



IMSA ST class MINI JCW race car front brakes


My cousin is ambivalent about the cross-drilled rotors on his M2. He and I track our cars, so he pushes them pretty hard. His comment has been “they came on the car”.

I will probably try a set of cross-drilled rotors on my MINI for the track, just because I want to see if I notice anything like what Bill Hawe feels... Or, just because I can.

Bottom line - These features don’t improve the performance of the brakes, as in out right stopping power. In a race car, where brake pedal feel is really important, they can improve that. In a street car, even one that is being taken to the track, these features would be more for looks, cosmetic.

The best thing that the GP 3 has going for it, with respect to brakes, is the large diameter and large thickness rotors. With the right brake pads, these should be fade free for many hours of racing.

Hope that helps.

 

Drilled rotors plus bell carriers are good for the thermal management and save around 1,5 kgs per wheel.




When the GP arrives, we will for sure test new camber brg`s for the F87, they go as well on F56

 

Did you notice the wheel ext. ,they are good for 245, and fit the GP

 

That is a high-performance brake, the rotors are good in the US for 4 years, and save you a lot of money on your daily trip.

 

Clutch Wotan - Have you tried camber/caster plates to allow an increase in caster along with an increase in negative camber?

And, yes, a two piece rotor, with an aluminum hat, will save weight. But, as you noted, is expensive.

 

I know this isn't a brake rotor discussion but let me just have a final comment before I stop. I understand the arguments on both sides about slotted or drilled (or both) brake rotors. Somewhere in the back of my mind lies the fact that every high-performance car manufacturer incorporates these rotor designs into their top models. Furthermore, every modern day motorcycle manufacturer installs slotted/drilled rotors on their motorcycles. You'll find this rotor design on every vehicle where performance braking is mandatory, from go-carts to mountain bikes. I honestly believe that there is much more to this than we have the room or the need to discuss here. Thanks.

 

Rich - You have a point and I don’t have a good answer (maybe someone else knows for sure) as to why the manufactures put these on the cars, especially cars that will spend most of their life on the street. I am not aware of any definitive testing that has been performed that says either way about any performance benefits from these features. However, this subject is discussed all over the place, just like here.

A lot of people will say they is just for looks. I have read that earlier race brake pads would off gas a lot when they got hot and these features helped with that. I have also read that modern brake pads don’t do this and the holes and slots are not necessary. Cross-drilled will fail earlier than non-drilled. IMSA race cars seem to only use slotted. Then I have what Bill Hawe said about brake pedal feel which he gets from cross-drilled and that is important with him. Clutch Wotan uses cross-drilled.

The bottom line is, brakes only need to be able to over power the tires and have no fade (with the proper pads) with extended hard use. There is no performance gains to be had if those two things are met and those can be met with plain face rotors. From there it will be “dealers choice” for anything else (eg: “feel”, weigh savings...).

For the other applications (motorcycles, bikes, go-karts), there is a definite weight savings. Also these features will clear water, mud, etc. off the pads and rotors, which can prevent the brakes from working. There may also be a better feel.

 

RE:Rotors
As a person who works metals on a daily basis, there are many factors to consider with steel rotors. When solid, metal has a crystalline structure. The outer edge of a disc becomes hotter than the core as the outer edge travels faster than the inner plus you have the friction heat from the pad. This causes stress, uneven heating. While softer alloys (like iron rich) have less stress, thus less cracking, they also have less strength and wear faster. Strategically placed vents and holes will compensate for some this but there is less surface area thus less friction thus less stopping power. On the other hand, braking constantly for 24 hours is quite different than a 20 minute autocross day or a 2 hour race. Then one must consider track conditions and wheel well cooling/venting. Another factor is metal fatigue. The constant heating (extreme) and cooling has a softening or hardening effect depending upon the alloy and temperatures. Let's also throw in automatic transmissions. Even with downshifting autos wear brakes faster, up to 50%. It will be interesting to see what EV's will do. Brakes will probably last the life of the car but the motors maybe not so much as they will take most of the wear of braking, bearings and such. I would assume that MINI designed the GP3 with the European series in mind, not 24 hours at Le Mans.
My 2 cents woth.
By the way on Jan 15 my dealer sent me an email asking if I wanted to order a GP3. I declined because no matter where I park, could be in the middle of a desert, some (deleted) always parks 3" away from me.

 

Would the “deleted” be “pickup truck”? That’s what usually happens to me...

 

245's on these cars are bit on the "clown-shoes level" IMO.... Plus... even on dry warm days with sticky tires.... I think you have passed the ideal width for this chassis at 245... much less on a wet day.... but hey, thats just my opinion.

 

Thks for your opinion. Luckily to me I could test it over the last 6 years on several F56. On a wet day, I change to ultra grip "Monsum" in 225 with the respective off-set.
With regards to the "clown shoe" that`s fine as long it is the fastest clown.

I am keen to see how you will mod your GP3 - Give us a feedback !