My cam is also a bit weak below 2500, The pressure on the pedal at low range needs to be slow and steady till it hits 3000 then it takes off like a motorcycle. As per your pertronics discussion, I wonder how the 123 distributor does the advance springs. Seems to work well, but I never tried an original distributor, did not have one. I also would not buy a 286 cam for street use. I probably also would change the final drive from 2.9 to 3.X. With the current needles, I can accelerate in 4th again. I could not before because there was always too much fuel being dumped in. I have an air/fuel meter and watching that tells you how to push on the pedal, and where to change the needles. The minty program is useful but slow to input needles one at a time to find the new curve you are looking for. But it does work. And my engine combo was much stronger than the 1275 that was on the dyno before mine. If you are in the Sacramento area, Driving Ambition (dyno guy) seems to know mini and how to tune them.

Jerry

That seems plausible, Jeg. You're way ahead of me on that one. The dip in the mid range is probably related to the mixture. It was not a good motor for city driving because it was quite gutless below 2500 rpm. I think the cam duration was around 276. I would not choose such a cam again, indeed, my Traveller has a locally ground cam that is quite sedate in comparison. I can putt along at 1500rpm in 4th and accelerate, no problem. It was fun to accelerate the Cooper S slowly and wait for the kick at 2500rpm.

My opinion re. Larry's dyno curves -

I would attribute the difference at 3K to the mechanical spring construction of the contact breaker points beginning to flutter, decreasing the dwell angle as a consequence.  As dwell angle decreases, the effective ignition timing advances, which isn't always a good thing when the coil hasn't had enough time to build an electrical charge to fire the plugs.

Electronic ignition is more stable at high rpms, dwell angle more consistent, and you get a more reliable spark as a result.

I agree, Larry, that the engine build characteristics generally set the curve.
The points apparently did a little better in the low end and the ignitor's curve is rougher there too, up to about 3,000 rpm. Might that be cam-related?
.

In any points versus Ignitor test I've seen the Ignitor always made more hp, typically up to 5% more, which was the purpose of my side by side test. In detail the Ignitor curve is also smoother than the points curve which confirmed my impression that the motor ran better. I believe the curves should have the same shape because shape is determined by the characteristics of the motor not the spark. The dyno operator didn't think there would be any difference. When I showed the results to David Anton at APT he thought the difference was due to different atmospheric conditions.

Larry: it is interesting to see how similar the curves for points and Pertronix were. 

For comparison, here's my former Cooper S with 73.1 hp. The red line is with Pertronix Ignitor, blue points. Specs. +20 Cooper S 1275, heavily modified 12G940 head, horsed-out HS2s, SPVP3 scatter cam, 1.5:1 rockers. 

I do have a PDF of the power curve, but I can't post that. engine has: 1380 with a teflon coating on the pistons (don't know how that helped). 123 distributor. 286 cam, dual 1.5 SU, ported and skimmed head to get compression to 10/1, cheap set of roller rockers. Not much else besides lots of tuning on the SUs. I am on my 9 set of needles, but it runs pretty good now. I will see if I can convert this pdf to a jpeg.

https://goo.gl/photos/uKgiXtMcuVAYzeCe6

If its a DIY engine tell us what you did. Do you have a picture of the power and torque curves?

Can't you just be satisfied with getting your Mini TO a dynanometer?

(Nice! by the way!)

I got my car on the dyno. 73.7 HP at the wheels. Now if I could only go to Mini West and do the Autocross. That would be fun!

Jerry