View Full Version : How fast are Minis?

Joel Simmons
12-27-2003, 12:52 AM

I was just reading an issue of Mini World where they had a Mini club from the UK run all their cars on a dyno to see what their cars are producing in terms of bhp. A couple of them were downright sorry with only about 25bhp, however, a couple were around 85bhp and one had 120bhp.

That being said, how much does a Mini weigh? What sort of hp:weight ratio do these horsepower numbers produce?

Just interested in exactly how fast a Mini can be (I know they're quick in the corners) with such a wide range in horsepower being produced by the A-series engine.


12-27-2003, 08:52 PM
Well, there are Minis and there are Minis!

Are we talking stock Minis? What model, what engine, what year?

A Mk.I or Mk.II Cooper 1275 "S" weighed about 1440 lbs. (in regular road trim) and produced 76 (advertised) bhp. In good tune, on a long straight road, you could probably do just short of 100.

Later, fuel injected models produced more hp, but also weighed more....so maybe they could do 100 or just a little more.

The big problem with top speed in a Mini is aerodynamics....they don't have any! images/icons/grin.gif You've gotta add a lotta horsepower for a little gain in top speed.

A 120 hp Mini would accelerate like scalded cat, but would probably top out at only 110-115 or so.

Joel Simmons
12-28-2003, 02:06 AM
Hi Xracer,

Most of the Minis in the article seemed to be later model ones like the Mini City or Mini Sport...ones that were never imported to the U.S. A few of them had the 998cc engine (?) and some had 1275cc and others had 1380cc engines.

I guess I'm not too worried about the top speed of a Mini, just wanted to know how fast one could accelerate. The only racing experience I have is in drag racing. Have any specs on a suped-up Mini in the 1/4 mile? It would put things into persepective for me.


12-28-2003, 03:29 AM
Several years ago, David Vizard ran a 112 hp Mini at the strip, and clocked a 14.2 @ 89.9mph. Too much wheelspin in first and second.

12-31-2003, 11:08 PM

Keep reading Mini Magazine and Mini World. They routienly publish 1/4 mile times for Minis (and now most likely MINIs). I have seen NOS times in the high 9s, yes 9 seconds for the Mini. It is rare, but they do exist.

01-09-2004, 01:26 PM
I have some "real-life" experience here. I lived about 2 miles from Connecticut Dragway (now the Consumer's Report Automotive Test Site) and often took it there.

My stock '64 Mini Cooper 1071 "S" would usually turn the 1/4 mile in the mid-18 second range. My fastest time was 18.2. Since the 1071 "S" would accelerate as fast as the stock 1275 "S", they would do about the same.

Those were the speeds of stock, road going, Mini Cooper "S"s of the '60's.

Nowadays, with very modified engines (and probably tube frames, rear wheel drive, aluminum bodies, VTech engines....maybe even Hemi-Chryslers, etc.), I'm sure they're much faster. images/icons/grin.gif

[ 01-09-2004: Message edited by: Xracer ]</p>

01-20-2004, 12:54 PM
How about say a Mini 1000 in daily driving? Can it keep up at 65 to 70 mph?

01-20-2004, 01:44 PM
<blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr> Huck6 said: How about say a Mini 1000 in daily driving? Can it keep up at 65 to 70 mph?

My understanding, merely from talking to Mini owners who I know, is that a Mini with the 998cc engine is capable of freeway driving. However being a small motor, it will make the driving experience a little noisy, but it is certainly up to the challenge. For a little nicer freeway driving try to track down a Mini 1000 that has had a BMC 1275 installed, but the 998cc engine is still good enough.

I even know a guy who has driven the freeway between Montreal and Kingston, Ontario to attend a car show in his 1959 Morris Mini Minor (with all of 850cc engine), this would be roughly a 3 to 4 hour drive one way, but that smaller engine isn't generally reccomended for freeway running.

01-23-2004, 12:30 PM
A Mini 1000 will cruise reliably all day at 75-80....the only problem is that it will be a bit "buzzy". They were normally fitted with a 3.44 rear end as a compromise between acceleration and top speed.

If you're going to do a lot of highway driving, I'd suggest that you install a 2.9 rear end (though, actually, it's in the front, isn't it?) images/icons/grin.gif

Old and In the Way
01-24-2004, 12:34 AM
I had a '65 Austin 848 with drum brakes. Loved the handling, but I drove from Richmond to Blacksburg, VA in the summer. Could barely hold 70, and nearly overheated (stopped at the top of a mountain to cool off). When I got home, I sold it to an aspiring racer who planned to change to front discs and a 1275.

01-24-2004, 02:18 PM
I basically burned up a 1000 engine in my '73 by driving it at 60 to 70mph. Anything over 30 deg C and the cooling system can't keep up. And the revs are way up there at those speeds. I wouldn't recommend daily high way commuting in one. Too bad an "affordable" 5 speed wasn't available.
I guess if one was able accept more frequent bottom end rebuilds of the engine, you could run one regularly at higher speeds.

Super 7
01-24-2004, 03:21 PM
I heard that at higher speeds the fan looses its ability to move air through the wheel well to cool the radiator.

14.2 in the quarter is pretty quick. My Brother's Sunbeam Alpine 1750 ran 18.65. My Ford Cortina 4 door ran 18.8 at 80.

Those cars are not about drag racing.