The new Mini Cooper SD twin-turbo diesel has just been revealed. With 170 hp (125 kW) and a 0 - 62 mph (100 km/h) time of just 7.2 seconds with the optional 6-speed Steptronic transmission, the SD promises to be the fastest and most powerful diesel-powered Mini ever produced.
Built at the British Mini plant in Oxford, England, the Cooper SD sports a hood scoop, big fog lights, 17-inch alloy wheels and a set of twin central tailpipes at the rear. It also wears the traditional sporting livery associated with Minis of old; twin white stripes on the hood and the option of racing green paint for the body.
With the help of variable turbine geometry and common rail injection with electromagnetic valve injectors, the Mini's 2.0-litre 4-cylinder diesel engine produces a professed 280 lb.ft (360 Nm) of torque at just 1,500 rpm. Yet the Cooper SD manages a claimed average fuel consumption of 4.0 - 4.1 L/100 km (57.3 - 58.8 mpg US / 68.9 - 70.6 mpg UK).
Building on an increasingly long heritage of new-era Minis and, in particular, sporting variants of the "S" and "SD" models, the new Mini SD features brake energy regeneration, an auto Start/Stop function, and electric power steering.
Keen-eyed readers will also note that there is only an "S" badge on the Mini's grille, but a full "SD" badge on its rear. Given the Mini's sporty nature, one can only assume that the rear is mostly what the designers expected everyone to see at the local traffic lights grand prix.
Whatever the reason, the new Mini SD promises to be quite a peppy little car with great fuel economy. And, if previous models are anything to go by, a popular one too.
Source: BMW
I am hoping that it will inspire Mercedes to bring a Smart diesel to the USA. It would be neat with a turbor. I read that a turbo charged diesel Smart car won the Cannonball Run in Europe one year. It is like the 'turtle and the hare' story but with cars.
In the early '70s my uncle made a good living installing carbs on vehicles that allowed them to run on CG or gas. He converted the entire 7up fleet in the bay area. And the change paid for itself quickly for individuals. One big side benefit was engine longevity. Instead of the engine needing a rebuild or replacement from carbon buildup, it would last 3-4 times longer.
So why didn't the Big 3 (now the Little 3) sell cars that ran on CG? It was cheaper than gas then, less polluting, and caused less engine wear. Now it's replacing coal with half the pollution. And still not in cars? Whatever the reason for the regulation/taxation we lose. I propose we stop govt. from controlling products/services and let the market decide.