It’s not that it controls slippage, it’s that its torque suppression is overly-aggressive and lacks finesse. The motor and power delivery system has enough potential to motivate the car to much quicker “0-illegal” times sooner than it currently does — without real wheel spin — but from a standstill to around 20 mph (in my experience) the torque is significantly muted. This is likely done to protect the driveline components and the battery pack more than anything else. For comparison, the 2012 Model S had roughly double the torque of our SE, but roughly double the mass as well, yet it could hit 60 in around four seconds — even in the wet! — thanks to its much more intelligent traction control.
I didn't realize the SE's torque limiting continued beyond take-off. I read it was implemented only to prevent wheel-spin. Is 199 lb-ft enough to break traction in this front-heavy, 3,100-lb car at 19 mph if there was no traction control?
It’s not that it’ll spin the wheels at 19, it’s that traction control not a binary condition; the TC doesn’t suddenly disappear at 20. For a brief time in the mid-80s I was the lucky co-driver of a Shelby Omni GLH-S (lol), and while it probably only weighed about 2200 pounds, it had about 170 lbf•ft on tap and could melt its front tires in spite of its limited-slip differential. That car could shame V8 Camaros and Mustangs of the era in both a straight line as well as in the twisties. Oh, and ask me about “drifting before drifting existed” in a Buick GNX (which, in hindsight, I’m grateful I only had for a weekend). Good times.
MINI's press releases would have us believe the SE's ECU limits torque only when it detects wheel-spin.
I’m gonna go out on a limb here and suggest that’s standard marketing for pretty much any TC and DSC system. When it gets milder, and I’ve slapped the summer tires back on, I’ll probably do a back roads seat of the pants test in roller mode and see how it feels.
No, I believe I could accelerate faster if I had a second motor spinning the rear wheels. Now do I need to accelerate faster? Not really. It's plenty quick as is. But if they're going to make a JCW version, adding a second motor to the rear would result in a quicker car vs adding a larger motor up front. FWIW, I don't think it'll happen in the hardtop, but maybe in the future Countryman SE.
The traction control is really subtle. If you try minimum TC, you will be able to feel the wheels spin. I can spin the stock 'kooks, my wrG4 winters and even warm RT660s. I suspect that I could accelerate slightly faster if I left the TC on, but it is more fun educational hooning through the cones with it off.
The 250hp JCW spec is suspiciously close to the i4 M50 255hp front motor. If Mini decides to do a GP version with both front and rear M50 motors, I would have to make that happen.
Ok, but that's in Canadia loonie-toonie funny-money... only about $3.50 in freedom dollars (smokin' deal!).
In Albuquerque‽ You can count the number of snow days with your socks on, and when it does fall, it ain't sticking around long.
The nice thing about EVs is how unobtrusive TC is. You can instantly just dial down torque, and give it back just as fast. In an ICE car you have to shut the throttle body, or cut timing or spark or boost, and the feedback loop on that is much slower. You can watch TC on action on the little power meter on the left. When TC is pulling power the needle drops. The soft start and pulling power with wheel angle seem like fully separate software bits, and honestly it's pretty invisible. Dyno mode will just one wheel stripe all corners, it doesn't have any effect on straight line in my experience, still has the soft start.
Yeah, they're overkill. I wish the car had come with all seasons, but here we are. I like the Pirelli Sotozeros on our Clubman a lot better.
