Rather than muck up other threads with talk of this I thought it would be good to just have a thread about the reviews of teh R56 thus far and what they mean because this seems to be a point that a lot of people are arguing about.

First the reviews (in alpahbetical order). If you have any reviews to add to this list, let me know and I'll edit them in:

Auto Express:
Link: http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/carrevi...3849/mini.html
Result: 1st out of 4 cars (against VW GTI, Ford Focus, Renault Clio)
Quotes: The nose is longer, higher and more bulbous – and less attractive to our eyes... much more responsive than the slightly wheezy supercharged motor in the outgoing Cooper S... the fizzing soundtrack has gone, but in day-to-day use that quickly proved tiring... Zig Zag Hill feels like the MINI’s natural home... Its immediacy means it’s thrilling at all speeds

Autoweek:
Link: http://www.autoweek.com/apps/pbcs.dl...8/newsletter01
Results: Was actually a "blog" and not an official review and concludes that the R56 is a "mixed bag"
Quotes:
with a 7-hp gain, it comes across as a more refined and flexible powerplant [but] from a character point of view, it feels more like a small front-drive BMW than an entity unto itself... [the radio and wiper controls are] software engineering run amok, saying to the driver, “Look what I can do!” instead of asking, “What do you want?”

Car & Driver [edited]
Link: http://www.caranddriver.com/comparis...d-touring.html
Result: 3rd out of 5
Quotes: you begin to notice how self-conscious it all is... The clutch is snappy quick, the brakes are abrupt, the steering is darty, the ride is nasty. Yep, they managed to capture ’60s rawness in a brand-new $23,900 box... The twin-scroll turbo has great reflexes...

CNet
Link: http://reviews.cnet.com/2007_Mini_Co...+Mini+Cooper+S
Result: 9.3 (spectacular)
Quotes:
The engine in the 2007 Mini Cooper S accelerates well and brings in good fuel economy... We can find very little wrong with the Mini Cooper S... Good-looking and one of the most fun cars on the road, the 2007 Mini Cooper S is well-engineered throughout.

Edmunds
Link:
http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do...ticleId=120652
Result: Some criticism but very positive review
Quotes: There's no doubt this Mini is a better driver than before... when it comes to delivering performance and a little environmental street cred, the Mini Cooper S is streets ahead... the interior comes as a letdown

MSN
Link: http://autos.msn.com/advice/article....tentid=4024344
Result: very positive preview
Quotes: it's better than it ever was—in every way... The interior has been totally made over to be even more stylish without losing the fun... So cleaner and leaner again, and way less clunky, but the biggest difference is in the power delivery... If it matters to you, it also rides much more compliantly than it did before (when it was as comfortable as a wakeboard)

Motor Trend
Link: http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...07_mini_cooper
Results: Very positive review
Quotes: it's clear that what was a good package to begin with has become even better... Mini faithful just had to hear the supercharger's whine, but any trepidation such diehards have will quickly become a thing of the past the first time they put the pedal to the floor... Couple the ride's newfound suppleness with the turbo's pulling power, and the car can assault sweeping turns at over 130 mph with complete confidence.

Motoring File
Links:
http://motoringfile.com/2007/02/07/m...the-2007-mini/
http://motoringfile.com/2007/05/16/m...g-term-review/
Result: Very positive review
Quotes: BMW nailed this car. The new MINI is a better MINI for both the enthusiast and the non-enthusiast alike. Some of the visceral character of the previous car has been lost. However, so much more has been gained in performance and livability.

NAM
Link: https://www.northamericanmotoring.co...ad.php?t=91593
Result: Very positive review
Quotes:
Road & Track
Link:http://www.roadandtrack.com/article....rticle_id=5246
Result: 2nd out of 5 in performance but 4th out of 5 overall
Quotes:
Can't tell the new car from the old [2002-2006] car, unless they're parked side by side... It was the most fun on the track...Ergonomics? Wonky, as style steps on function.

Top Gear (R53 vs. R56):
Link: http://www.topgear.com/content/featu...ries/16/1.html
Result: Strong nod to the R56
Quotes: The Mini has grown up a bit. The new car is 30 per cent better in nearly every respect... better balanced, has more mature handling, and the quality is better... there's part of me that drives the old Cooper S and thinks that a little bit of the old-school attitude has been sacrificed on the altar of empirical improvement

Top Gear (small car of the year):
Link: http://www.topgear.com/content/news/stories/1429/
Result: Small Car of the Year
Quote: the most fun car we've driven this year

 

Thanks StGabriel, good to have this stuff in one place. Here's the C&D link:
http://www.caranddriver.com/comparis...d-touring.html

 

Comments:
The reviews are all over the place. From CNET which has nothing but praise for all things MINI to some very "wishy washy" reviews from Road & Track and Car & Driver.

What can be said with certainty is that the more professional/magaziner reviewers have been very critical while other reviews have been very positive. Also, it's clear that "wonky ergonomics" are at the center of a lot of the criticism.

What does that mean? Well probably a lot of things. It seems to mean that a lot of professional review sites seem to be going for "new and shiny" over what is just an incremental change to the MINI. It's not clear that they are presenting a very useful picture. For example, Road & Track gave the R56 second place for performance and even called it the "the most fun on the track" yet only gave it 4th out of 5 entrants in the overall, offering only "wonky ergonomics" as criticism.

This trend of getting bored with the MINI and/or favoring newer entrants to the field isn't new to the R56. For example, a recent Edmund's roundup of "Sport Compacts" including the '06 MINI awarded the MINI 4th place ahead of the the Chevy Cobalt, VW GTI but trailing behind the Civic Si, the Subaru WRX and the Mazdaspeed 3.

No one doubts the improved performance of the R56. Whereas, in the Edmund's roundup, the '06 MINI lagged behind the competition, the '07 was only behind the Mazdaspeed 3 in the R&T review and only by a very slim margin (194.8 vs 192.2, although admittedly the Mazdaspeed won every category except fuel efficency, where the R56 had a large advantage).

It's clear that there is a lot of subjectivity going on with these reviews. But how useful is that subjectivity to consumers? It's not clear that it's very useful at all. For example, R&T rates the Mazdaspeed 3 a 15.0 for exterior style yet only gives the MINI an 11.3. Given that they also say that the new MINI is almost indistinguishable from the old one, does this make any sense to anyone? Even the basis for judginG the cars in reviews seems arbitrary: despite big differences in performance the MINI only picks up a few points on overall perfromance versus competitors and yet loses lots of points, relative to the competition, for lesser metrics such as trunk space and seats (and exterior which makes no sense).

One thing that many people on these forums want to talk about is the "raw" drive of the old versus the "smooth" ride of the new. Certainly there's a lot to be said here. However it should be noted that almost none of these reviews are talking about this and, aside from a few comments about runflats the R56 has generally received high marks for its ride. Autoweek is the closest the mainstream press has gotten to criticising the R56 for going "smooth" and that was only a complaint about losing the supercharger whine which seems spurious at best. [edited after reading C&D] Car & Driver is more critical but in a very contradictary way. They complain that the ride is too harsh, not the other way around and no other review, even the negative ones, seem to match their results. Also, a lot of their complaints seem to focus on the DSC.

So what are we left with? Generally universal praise for the performance enhancements and a lot of criticism of ergonomics and lots of fun being made of the big 'ol speedometer. That's useful, certainly, and it's clear that a lot of people have issues with certain aspects of the interior. But there is no clear mandate, as seems to be often intimated, that the R56 is a disaster. In fact, one really has to wonder why the car isn't seeing a lot of praise if the worst thing that can be said of it is that the speedometer is big and the radio controls a bit funky. Certainly these things matter. But do they matter as much as "the most fun to drive" or the great performance numbers that the new MINI is putting down? It's not clear that they do or should and as such, several of these reviews are highly suspect.

 

Reviews aside, it's the coolest car on the street is this podunk town.

John 2007 MCS Sparkling Spring Water Silver

 

Fith Gear (video): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1uA7e-sB3EQ

Fifth Gear (print): http://fifthgear.five.tv/jsp/5gmain....d=527&x=16&y=3

Top Gear R53 vs. R56 comparo: http://www.topgear.com/content/featu...ries/16/1.html

Jeremy Clarkson (from Top Gear) reviews the R56 for the Times: http://driving.timesonline.co.uk/tol...cle1394750.ece

Top Gear names the R56 the "Best Small Car of the Year": http://www.topgear.com/content/news/stories/1429/

MC2 Magazine: http://www.mc2magazine.com/All_About_the_2007_MINI.cfm

MotorWeek (video): http://mpt.org/motorweek/video/roadt...5b_flash.shtml

MotorWeek (print): http://driving.timesonline.co.uk/tol...cle1394750.ece

MotorTrend (Europe): http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...07_mini_cooper

MINI2 (Cooper S): http://www.mini2.com/review24-full-s...ve-report.html

MINI2 (Cooper):http: http://www.mini2.com/review25-mini2-...ni-cooper.html

Autoweek (another one): http://autoweek.com/apps/pbcs.dll/ar.../61127015/1004

Car Magazine(Cooper): http://www.carmagazine.co.uk/first_d...sid=274&page=1

Car Magazine (Cooper S): http://www.carmagazine.co.uk/first_d...page=1&sid=218

Autoblog names the R56 the most beautiful city/compact: http://www.autoblog.com/2006/11/05/w...l-autos-named/

Sign up for Winding Road ( http://www.windingroad.com/about) and theres a review of the R56, as well as a comparo, featuring the 4-door GTI and Volvo C30.

Edmunds Inside Line: http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Drives/FirstDrives/articleId=117072?tid=edmunds.il.home.photopanel..1

Automobile (early pre-production car): http://www.automobilemag.com/features/news/0608_2007_mini_cooper_s/

 

Very interesting work, guys...thanks so much! Along with media reviews it's worth noting that lots of R50/53 owners are now also driving R56. Based on my own exprience I must say the car is superb...and that comes from spending weeks/months with the car, not just hours. I may not be able to provide a professional evaluation, but those with experience in both also have a valuable perspetive.

 

Thanks for adding that great list msh441. Great to have the European perspective better represented. I'll give 'em a better read as I have a chance but it looks like these mostly swing the overall trend of reviews towards very positive.

 

Kudos to Clarkson's review! It is hilarious but to the point. Check it out if you guys still haven't read it.

Some of the negative comments:

 

Holy Crap (my new R56 slogan!) - great job you guys.

I've always found it ridiculous that the Mini is thrown in with much larger cars for reviews - I mean the Mazda 3 is a 4 door wagon for crying out loud. To then have it loose lots of points because of its size is ridiculous. I understand why they put it into the comparo - its a sporty hatchback. But if you are going to ignore its size to include it, then you have to ignore its size to rate it. Otherwise its a formula designed to make it come in at the bottom of the pack. Its contradictory. Bogus.

For some the most irritating thing about the car is that: , , , are you ready for it?

WE LOVE IT!

 

I had these in the list on my blog. Oldies but goodies...

Forbes
http://www.forbesautos.com/reviews/2...r/preview.html

MSN Autos
http://autos.msn.com/advice/article....tentid=4024344

MC2 - Turbo S Engine
http://www.mc2magazine.com/Page.cfm?InfoID=6075

AutoExpress
http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/carrevi..._golf_gti.html

Channel 4
http://www.channel4.com/4car/rt/mini/cooper+s/1082/1

 

What is the concern over reviews? Test drive the car and make up your own mind.

 

Right on, chows. Most of the reviews talk about 1/4 miles and top speeds, or obvious things like there's no concert hall in the back, or the gong-sized speedometer. The only way to know if it's "your" car is to test drive it.

 

I agree. But there seemed be back and forths in a lot of threads on reviews (including some from you) about whether the R56 was or was not getting good reviews and what the C&D, R&T and Autoweek reviews meant. I thought that, if people were going to talk about all this, it would be useful just to have a thread for it.

I'm adding more reviews to the master list and filling in "quotes" and such from them.

 

I think this is a great idea. It's nice to have it all in one thread. I found the reviews to be helpfull in deciding to order my R56. my first mini btw.

 

My concern over reviews is that some people use them to unfairly and incorrectly characterize the R56. Having them linked and referenced makes it easier to de-bunk the dis-information.

 

Agreed.

StGabriel, thanks for the great post! Thanks also to msh441 and inomis. Great work guys!

Reviews are what they are ...opinionated. You either agree with them, sort of agree with them, or you don't. I'm in the hi-fi biz where products live and die by reviews, so they obviously aren't taken lightly. But, it is a great shame that they are given so much credence.

I really hope that unlike in the hi-fi biz, where lots of folks buy very expensive gear without listening to it ...that no one buys a car based on a review. Use reviews to narrow down the list of cars to drive, drive them, then decide.

Thanks again folks. There is enough reading material there to keep me unproductive at work for days !!

dean.

 

Guys ... a bit of probably unwanted advice but I will throw it out anyway since it looks like your both new to the MINI world. Feel free to ignore it if you choose ...

IMO, your setting yourselves up for failure. Your defending your "choice" of car. Your all worried about what other people think or need validation? This is no different than the threads you see pop up about every other week ... fill in the blank

People say MINIs are cute/chick/clown/gay cars ... What am I to do?

Look here. One just popped up. This is small stuff. There are far more important things to worry about than to worry about criticisms over a depreciating asset that one day ends up in a junkyard. Well, how about dealing with it? You bought what you liked. Why do you care what others think? Your money. Your car. If you like it (and hopefully your SO) ... then boop on everyone else. Do you need validation from some journalists??? If tomorrow R&T wrote that R56s are terrible, would you sell your car?

This is no different than people outside the MINI culture bashing MINIs because "they" think MINIs are cute or clown cars except its sibling rivarly

Fact is ... they ain't building the R53 anymore. BMW has moved on ... If I just bought a R56, I would move on too and just not respond or worry about "bad press" or ... no SC whine.

If these kinds of things really bother you, you got a long hard road of ownership because wait until your friends think you got a chick car and people in other forums say you got a clown car. Remember, IMO, the more you feed the "haters", the more they "win." When you ignore them ... the "haters" ... hate that.

Out with the old ... in with the new. Peace.

Off soapbox ... and I never thought I would say this because its such a cliche ... stop worrying and go hit some twisties

 

I think you're reading too deeply into this.

First of all, while compiling this list I am stepping back and making no judgements about the reviews themselves. If an article is critical of the R56 at points, even if it is overall very positive, I will make sure that the "quotes" reflect that. So at least in creating a large list of reviews I'm not "defending" anything although I will certainly comment on reviews that seem somewhat suspect or internally inconsistent after the fact.

Secondly, reviews KEEP on coming up while discussing other things and if that's going to be the case I think we should just consolidate discussion in a thread unto itself. If nothing else it will alleviate the need to clutter other threads with "defenses" of the R56.

For example, you recently said in a thread:

And there was a little discussion of that. Well, you know, I'm just not seeing that really reflected in the reviews. What review said the plastics were "cheap"? Not C&D, not R&T and not the recent Autoweek blog which seem to be the most negative of the bunch. Almost every other review I've read has liked the interior and none have mentioned "the plastics". There's been a lot of talk about how well the car is "resonating" with professional reviewers but, well, actually there are far more positive reviews than negative ones. In fact I've only found 1 reviews and 1 blog that were overall negative (just the text about the R56 in R&T is actually fairly glowing), and a few smaller criticisms in otherwise very positive reviews.

Another example, a recent thread (the "Are you Loving your '07? Part2" thread) also got bogged down in a similar discussion when slag said:

It's not clear that slag's comment is true nor that this is productive discussion for a thread about loving the R56. I wanted to say something about it but in order to do so I'd have had to turn that thread into a debate over reviews. Instead I started a new thread for exactly this discussion and I've tried to start it out with an unbiased resource of reviews.

 

Uber cool advice chows!

 

No, I think this thread has definite merit in it's own right. Responding to others is secondary, I agree. In fact, I would not mind see this thread stickied...a great resource for those interested in R56. Imagine if we had a similar collection for R50/53??? That would have been nice.

 

StGabriel for president !

 

http://motoringfile.com/2007/06/04/d...aracter-flaws/

"Interior Plastics: ... in too many places it feels like MINI has either regressed or not upped the ante over the previous car. From the center console to the center stack, the plastic is either too thin or textured poorly. The turn signals, the vents and the glove box all share similar issues."

http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/?p=3188

Drivers are confronted by a wide range of organic looking toggles and indentures, operating all manner of controls. ... And who cares that not all the materials are above average?

Buzz lightyear

http://www.automotive.com/2007/43/mi...eup/index.html

Cosmetically, the audio and HVAC controls are one feature that nearly every reviewer has criticized. Made obviously of plastic, with a matte-gray in finish, the controls could be described as being refugees from a Buzz Lightyear remote control system. With their prominent positioning, they detract ...

Not a direct reference to cheap plastic but poor ergonomics

http://www.automobilemag.com/reviews..._s/index3.html

Then there's the new center console: ... the remaining switchgear appears to have been placed in a small bag, attached to a small incendiary device, detonated, and then glued in place where the pieces landed. There are fiddly little buttons everywhere. I found a few more each time I looked. The volume control for the radio is nowhere near the tuning ****. I am thirty-one years old, and I can operate an iPod blindfolded, but these controls I find baffling.

http://research.cars.com/go/crp/rese...ection=reviews

" ... except for the center control-and-gauge panel, which is the opposite: complicated and cheapened. ... once an understated black panel, now festooned with cheesy silvery plastic. ...

The temperature and fan dials — down near the actual volume **** — are as difficult to use as they are to see. The seat heater buttons, though more prominent, are just plain odd. They flank a row of iconic toggle switches whose levers have been fattened and shortened to a state of newfound inauthenticity.

The parade of ergonomic foibles continues with the backrest adjustment levers ...

An interesting one I'm sure someone will dismiss but not about plastics ... far worse

http://cars.uk.msn.com/News/car_news...mentid=5112584

"No car on sale is as overrated in my opinion. ... I’ll concede that in some forms it drives decently enough, but rivals do much the same for much less money.

That’d be forgivable if the Mini was as its name suggests – Mini. But it’s not. It’s massive. ... Which basically means the Mini’s no longer a car in the conventional sense. It’s a fashion item – a trinket for those lacking the imagination to choose anything else. ... It’s got the looks of the original inside and out, details ripped off and recreated in a shameless pastiche of the original cars. Where’s the innovation?"

Note: I am just providing the references ...

 

Well I think you can probably find a lot of comments from ppl here about that ... opinions. See https://www.northamericanmotoring.co...d.php?t=103238 Ryephile, a well respected member is selling his R56 because of this issue ... I believe. you can read it in the thread.

I'm not going to go search for these but in the reviews I just referred to, several noted the lack of rawness and one suggested the first thing that has to be changed was a new exhaust because the car is too quiet. However, virtually all said it was quicker than the old car but some did notice a small amount of turbo lag

That all said, I still believe there is no need to defend your buying choices but you own one, I don't (yet) So go for it if that makes you happy.

Peace and Best of Luck

 

I think the articles are a blast...I still have newspaper clippings on the R50 MINI from 2002!! Then we got Graham Robson's excellent book...we are unlikely to see the likes of this kinda stuff again. So.....these reads are an interesting bit of history if only that. It's funny how the press seemed unwilling to jump fully on-board w/ R50, too....seems a perennially safe mode for them.

 

That's a great list chow. There are, of course, also a lot of reviews praising different aspects of the interior and "plastics" but actually listing and referencing articles and talking about them instead of just making broad accusations is exactly what this thread is all about. You can see a number of counterpoints to these comments in the other reviews I've quoted above of course but it's clear, if nothing else, that the dash is controversial.

What's not clear is how big of an issue this really is. I.e. it can be true that the center console isn't perfect everyone yet it's not clear how damaging this is to the car as a whole (and as you yourselve have said, people can just go test drive the car and see if this bothers them). Most of those reviews you just quoted be matched up to glowingly positive reviews that may mention ergonomics but still say the new MINI is fantastic and much improved.

I think this is definitely worth discussing although it doesn't seem to be what slag was saying at all. He said that the R56 has not received excitement from the press. That is clearly false as there are many, many glowing reviews with comments such as:

The new car is 30 per cent better in nearly every respect... (Top Gear)
the most fun car we've driven this year... (Top Gear, Best Small Car)
the most fun on the track... (Road & Track)
a good package to begin with has become even better... (Motor Trend)
it's better than it ever was—in every way... (MSN)

Also while it is clear that a lot of articles have mentioned the lack of "rawness" and have alluded to missing the supercharger whine, the comments there have been all over the place and server to demonstrate that this is a very subjective point. C&D, in probably the most negative review the car has seen, actually said the car was too "harsh". Several reviewers have mentioned that the lost supercharger whine may miff some enthusiasts but go on to say that anyone driving the car will quickly get over that or that the supercharger whine was just annoying in the long run anyway.

I haven't really seen any reviewers (though some enthusiast blogs) that actually fault the ride itself as too refined. R&D, one of the "negative" reviews said that the car was the "most fun to drive" and gave it top marks in the subjective category for handling. Pretty much every single review has had little to find fault with here and a lot have even praised the car for being less rough than its predecessor. It's clear that there is an issue here and that some people will have different tastes (i.e. Ryephile) but it is in no way clear that the automotive press is really saying much about it other than a little bit of supercharger nostalgia. At least with the articles I've read thus far which seem to represent most of the larger publications.