Who had driven a new MINI that used to own a second gen? From the looks of it they are getting away from what makes them special. They are bigger and heavier and it appears to be that they are slower. What are your guys thoughts on the matter?

 

I own a 2012 R56S and have driven the F56 S and non-S versions which I had as loaners while my car was in for service. I didn't care for the F56 - in my opinion nowhere near as much fun to drive, the surge of torque that I get from my MCS isn't there and the F56S had horrible understeer, though with my suspension mods I'm a bit spoiled. Also I don't care for the aesthetics of the F56 - the catfish front bumper, Kim Kardashian butt, and horrible, horrible dash - but that's my personal reaction.

On the other hand - it is really easy to find yourself going very fast in the F56, you just don't quite know how it happened. Also the shocks and spring rates on the F56 do a really good job of dealing with nasty pavement vs. the R56, I was very impressed by the ride quality.

Ultimately it's a personal choice - I love the handling of my R56, and my wife hates riding in it because she thinks it's too stiff. Go test drive the F56 and decide for yourself.

 

I own a 2015 F56 MCS and my neighbor has a 2007 R56 MCS. We each drove one another's cars back to back. I drove his R56 before he drove my F56. His R56 felt really tight and I liked it a lot. My impression was that my F56 is significantly stronger in all gears and also had better mid-range (torque) performance as well. The F56 suspension felt more planted up to 130 mph with better damping and compliance. The fit and finish of the interior was also noticeably a step up compared to the R56.

After he drove my F56 (sport mode) he was amazed at how strong the 2.0 liter is through out the rev range. He was also impressed how composed the car is when pushed hard. That may be due in part to the sport suspension on my car and it maybe simply be due to more current suspension technology compared to an 8 year old R56. The increased horsepower and torque numbers also explain why the F56 is stronger.

Yes, the F56 is bigger and heavier than the R56 and appearance is a matter of personal opinion. However, there are plenty of people that think the F56 looks and performs just great and is very special indeed. The good news is that they are both a Mini and way cooler than almost anything else on the road. Maybe you should drive an F56 and see for yourself. You might just be surprised

 

I have a 2011 R56S. Almost 50k miles. Been great so far. All issues have been addressed under remaining factory warranty or my Hendrick extended warranty. I have been in a few loaner cars from MINI of Escondido while my car was in for warranty service. I was most recently loaned a 2015 F56 Justa with the 3 cyl turbo and an auto trans. I am not a fan of the new styling of the front end, nor the new more "acceptable" dash layout. The nose pokes out too much, and the new dash gets too far away from the original MINI design. I LIKE the big, center-mounted speedo! To not have that is a mistake, I think. But what do I know? The handling in the 2015 was about the same as my 2011, even with the 15 inch wheels, versus the 16's on my 2011. Having not driven the S model for 2015, I can't remark on the performance differences. I will say that the auto trans on this 2015 Justa seemed "clunky", and often times did not want to select the proper gear by itself. The Manual shift mode was also rather odd, as downshifting was a forward move, and up was a backwards move on the shifter. Maybe I am used to my 67 Chevelle, with her ratchet shifter? But, to me, downshift would be towards the back, and upshift would be a forward motion. And the dash. I really missed that big center mounted speedo. Now, that has been replaced with some kind of infotainment system, with a surrounding circular light bar that changes colors when you do ANY kind of adjustment to anything on the dash controls, including the climate controls. Not a big fan of that either. But, time moves on, things change. Not so good at adapting to those changes, maybe? Like Corvettes without ROUND tail lights, I guess it is a thing of the future. I just LOVE the layout of my 2011 R56S so much more than the new offerings. But, to each his own. Motor On!

 

I agree with a lot of things you said in your post. Many people don't care for the F56's front end styling treatment compared to the R53 and R56. Since this is my first Mini, I did not have to worry about having "to get used to" the design changes. FWIW, I always liked the center mounted speedo too.

I do enjoy the fact that the F56 has more Tech built into it like bluetooth, Mini Connected and many of the BMWish features that have been added. If I was a Classic, gen 1 or gen 2 previous owner, I might very well have a different opinion about all of this.

I am intrigued by the image below that shows all Mini generations front and back, side to side. It shows how big the gen 1, 2, and 3 cars are compared to the Classic Mini.

 

Slower? Where have you heard that?

As far as "fun-factor" I would actually rank them like this, from most fun to least fun:

R53/R50
F56
R56

I will unabashedly say that the R56 easily has the worst steering of the three, and the F56 has the best. Engines and suspension are best in the F56 (JCW Pro), but the lighter weight/lower height/more noise in the R53 can make it more fun.

 

While i have not driven the other models of the mini coopers i have to say i LOVE my R56. I think the steering is great especially coming from an S2000 before. Well with an Altima and Passat in between. But its perfectly heavy in sport mode. I like a lot of response. I just fear that MINI is getting away from what makes MINI a MINI. They have made it bigger and heavier. 0-60 times are almost a second slower from what I've seen. Not bashing on the new one. I don't like the tail lights though. I just hope it doesn't turn out like the mustang did when they started making the MACH 1. The new mustangs are nice though.

 

I've owned R53, do now own R56 and have driven F56 multiple times (S only).
IMHO (1= top, 2=close, but not top honors; 3=still cool; 4+=not so hot)

size:
1.R53; 2.R56; 4.F56

looks/design, exterior:
1.R53; 2.R56; 5.F56
R53 purest, R56 still ok, but F, oh that carp mouth with the railroad tie...

looks,design interior:
1.R53 and R56; 4.F56
R's: center round giant speedo makes sense with analog speedo. That's Mini and I love it. Tach where it should be: line of sight. ANY of the digital screen stuff in a round center bezel is just..., don't know. Wrong, silly?
F56: sorry, but the design is juts totally messed up: round center bezel with a rectangular screen inserted, and then rectangular center vents next to the round bezel, round outside vents: just messy. Steering col instrument cluster: tach as an afterthought is disappointing. Overall, nice quality materials in F but design just too over the top, not convincing.

engine performance, power:
1.R56; 2.F56; 3.R53
In terms of power for given weight, the 56's are even, but IMHO the R puts it down better or in a more fun way. More raw fun.

fuel economy:
1.R56; 2.F56; 6.R53
I've averaged better in R than F56. 53 was just abysmal.

suspension:
1. R56; 2.R53; 3.F56
53 too harsh, F too soft, R56 takes the crown.

steering:
1. R53; 3.R56; 5.F56
53 was made by the gods of steering response: direct, neutral, no torques. R56: gobs of torque steer :(, F: spongy (by comparison, stil better than most fun cars out there).

build quality (apparent):
1.F56; 6.the R's.
F is leaps and bound ahead of the Rs.

fun factor:
1: R53; 2.R56; 3:F56
53 purest of the lot, R56 almost at the same level, but with torque steer as fly in ointment. However, more visceral power delivery makes up for that a bit. F: still ok, but definitely 3rd in line.

Overall: that's of course a matter of personal preference.
For me:
1: R56, 2: R53, 3: F56

 

Where did you see that? The published 0-60 numbers from MINI claim that each new generation is faster than the previous. R56 faster than R53, and F56 faster than R56.

A second slower is massive. You must've been comparing S vs non-S.

 

I own a 2013 MCS, and have driven a 2015 MCS. I love my R56, the proportions are very balanced, the interior is pretty solid (before 2011 model years were starting to get dated). Mine is tuned with the BurgerTuning mod and it is extremely quick. 0-60 in 5.8 quick (for a MINI). The 2.0 doesn't sound all that great although the sport mode pops and bangs sound awesome. I think it's far too heavy and it's weight is noticeable in the bends. I think the R56 is far more enjoyable to drive, but the F56 has the better ride by far.

It depends on what you want. Personally I want something more hardcore, more exciting and louder. The R56 is the one for me, but if you want something technically better, more comfortable and better equipped, by an F56.

 

It is pretty amazing how much misinformation is commonly considered to be fact about these cars. It is equally amazing how misinformation is commonly accepted when it supports one's own opinion. Below is a quick comparison for width, length wheelbase and weight between Mini Mark III, R53S, R56S and F56S 2 door hardtops. BTW, all of these numbers come from Wikipedia.

Mini Mark III - 55.9" wide, 120.5" long, 80.3"wheelbase, 1344.8 or 1421.9 lbs depending on engine
R53 - 66.5" wide, 143.9 long, 97.1 wheelbase, 2678 lbs
R56 - 66.3" wide, 146.2 long, 97.1 wheelbase, 2668 lbs
F56 - 68" wide, 150.4 long, 98.2 wheelbase, 2760 lbs

As you can see the F56 is 92 lbs heavier, 1.7" wider, 4.2" longer and has a wheelbase that is 1.1" wider than the R56. Based on all of the comments about how bloated, huge and porky the F56 has become, can you just imagine how Alec Issigonis would have felt if he were alive when the R53 was introduced? He no doubt would have rolled over in his grave at the sight of the hideous beast that his baby had become. After all, the R53 was over 10" wider, 23" longer, 1250lbs heavier and had a wheelbase almost 17" wider.

To be fair about this, shouldn't it be the R53 that we should all blame for porkifying the Mini instead of the F56?

Below is a link for a .pdf comparing more details about these cars.

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...enerations.pdf

 

Everyone I see trashing the F56 are currently R56 owners, so please, dear readers, take these opinions with a grain of salt. The desire is strong to defend the cars we own.

Objectively speaking, I think it's a fairly safe assumption to say that the "MINIiest MINI" is the original, and that the best engineered is the F56, as it's obviously the most modern. That, and the RXX were largely designed by Rover (not BMW) who couldn't engineer themselves out of a paper bag.

 

Well of course, it's the R56 forum afterall
and of course, speaking of misinformation, just read up on wikipedia who developed the different variants.
that said, they're all MINIs and great cars. Just IMHO of these great cars, both Rs are more fun than the F (which is more modernificated, more practical, better quality). and of course, that's because I have an R56s.
But you know what, if I won an F in a lottery, I'd trade it for a used R and use the difference to mod it.

 

You may not have intended to bash, but if you go back and reread your posts, it really comes across that way.

Please, drive the F56 (have you even sat in one?), then feel free to bash all you want. But not before.

 

F56 Taillights way too big....Mickey-Mouse ears...and yes I agree too big..

 

I had an f56 loaner for a day last week and I was happy to get back to my familiar r56. Probably part of it was the loaner was an automatic and I always feel like I'm out of control whenever I'm driving an automatic. One thing I really like about the r56 is the range on a tank of gas.

 

I don't think anyone here is purposely trying to bash the F56, it's inherently an opinion based post. And yes, TECHNICALLY the F56 is not all that much bigger and barely heavier. Not knowing those specs, I was just going off of feel from when I drove the F56. It just seemed to have more body roll in the corners which gave the impression that it were heavier but the tradeoff is significantly better ride quality. Neither one is better, it's all personal preference.

But, that being said, I'll take my R56 all day long

 

Like some others, I've only driven an auto, non S F56 as a loner a couple times so I cannot compare the suspension and performance to my 6 speed '12 MCS. But, I can say that I like the quality of the interior pieces in the F56. Slightly more upscale with soft touch and not a ton of hard plastic. I liked the leather steering wheel better, it was smooth and not a rough texture like in my R56. I also like the feel and comfort of the seats, more bolstered and softer than mine. My loaner was a 2 door and a few things that would be a potential deal breaker based off of just the interior, if I were thinking about trading in for one... The fuel gauge/speedometer/tac. I love the center speedo on the R56 but the more traditional set up in the F56 does not look good at all. Everything is cramped together, the tach is very small and the fuel gauge just looks out of place and like an after thought. Another possible deal killer is interior room. The boot is slightly larger but I really didn't notice any extra room upfront and the rear area looked identical to mine in size. Why is the car bigger if there is no increase in interior space?? Maybe a couple inches of boot space, that's it. If they are going to make the car bigger, atleast make more usable space. And that reminded me of the drivers seat left elbow room. Is it just me or is there less room for your left elbow than in an R56??? Both times I drive the F56, I couldn't get over that. The R56 gives just enough room for your elbow on the door arm rest, the F56, it's seem to have gotten smaller. Based on just the interior, I couldn't go from mine to the F56 and be happy even with the higher quality materials. Just a few other observations, not comparisons... Even though it had 15 inch wheels and crappy tires, the justa did handle rather well. The 3 cylinder is suprisingly peppy but I hated the automatic. The shifts were definitely quick but the gearing was way too econo. 3 cylinders are already a little "buzzy," by nature but the automatic made the engine feel like it wanted to bog out. It created way too much vibration for my liking. I would much prefer to have a hard suspension and feel bumps than constant buzzing and vibration from the engine/auto transmission set up. I would no doubt opt for the manual transmission in this application.

 

Some day in the future when the new hardtop is designated a K56 there will be a lot of reminiscing about how wonderful the F56 was and how BMW has really screwed the pooch. It's called progress. My grandfather drove a Model A till he died in the late 60's because he hated the direction the auto companies had taken.

 

I hated the F56 looks when it first came out.. but the base is starting to grow on me... not a fan of the F56S front end still though

 

These kinds of generational comparisons are inevitably just armchair thought experiments because each individual is going to have some sort of slant or vested interest in defending or promoting a specific criteria or philosophy.

I've owned all three BMW MINI generations. They each have their positives and negatives. Buy the generation that fits your preferences and goals and stop worrying which is "best", because that metric is too personal to be universal.

 

^ I disagree with your first paragraph and agree with the second.

Speaking only for myself, I don't have any vested interest to defend. I'm just saying that there are things about the F56 that I don't like, and don't like enough that I wouldn't even consider trading my R56S for an F56. (Maybe that would be an interesting thread - what car would you trade your R53/R56 etc. for, and why.)

But your 2nd paragraph is right on.

The OP asked for opinions, and you know the old saying about opinions.

 

Just replaced my '09 R56 MCS w/ '16 F56 MCS. Improvements in technology are striking: nav, bluetooth and USB connectivity, quality of audio system, the whole BMW iDrive system takes a while to learn but makes the R56 feel quite primitive. As noted by others, the suspension is much more comfortable, while not giving up much if any handling crispness. The low and midrange torque is maybe the most dramatic improvement in performance, you can drive in 1 or 2 gears higher in any conditions. Fuel economy is greatly improved, I've gotten 40 mpg on the road. Count me as a big proponent of the F56.

 

I agree with you and when my 2011 JCW is ready to be put out to pasture, I see a Ford Focus RS in my future.

 

Novice track comparison:

https://www.northamericanmotoring.co...ml#post4205401