Interesting discussion. Though I was stuck deciding between an R53 and R56 (ultimately deciding to get an off-the-lot 06 MCS), I can also appreciate the R56 for what it is and will be.

I've come over to the MINI world from VW/AUDI and think their experience in moving from their gen 4 to gen 5 Golf/Jetta could be informative here. When I first purchased a Jetta in 2000, the 1.8T 4 had just come out and Jettas were flying off the lots (at least here in DC) as fast as they could unload them.

Fast-forward to 2005 and the gen 4 Jetta sales had completely crashed by the time the new re-design came out. In the re-design, the VW folks (I guess officially cueing off of Phaeton design language, but really looking like a Corolla) fairly dramatically altered the Jetta, making it substantially larger in size and generic in appearance. For example, the front end of the Jetta now is the same front end as the Golf/Rabbit, saves costs sure, but loses the Jetta DNA to some degree - the uniqueness that's stayed with it through past iterations.

I think in many ways BMW has largely done the opposite of VW in the MINI re-design. They have made the move for full redesign while the popularity remains high (I'm not sure of overall sales, either in NA or globally, if they had peaked or are still going up). In addition, in the design of the new car, while I think many good points have been made on this thread about some of the compromises and perhaps bone-headed decisions by BMW, in the end, the new car totally still seems like a MINI.

Time will tell, but I'd say that BMW's play has ensured not only the survival, but the growth and health of the brand by the R56 re-design.

To those on the fence, I really don't think you can go wrong, but I'd say if you find an R53 car on a lot somewhere that exactly or nearly matches your dream specs - go for it! They'll continue to improve the R56 while you motor around in your MINI!

 

You're right, of course!!! By my reckoning, for every "item of controversy" on R56 there are three or four improvements. Some are big, some are little...but they are there and they all add up. Does that make R56 more desirable? Not for a certain enthusiasts. R50/53 will be known for certain qualities, a certain design look, and certain handling characteristics...not to mention that it was the first New MINI...and that is all special.

R56 apparently comes off as being more refined/grown-up....but what does that mean? It means (among other things) that lots of our gripes have been ironed out/addressed. It will probably be an easier car to live with (more poised handling, better w/ runflats, improved ergonomics, quieter, smoother-running engine). It is a very logical second-generation MINI because they attempted to build on the strengths of the previous model while addressing several very critical needs for the car (current and new safety standards, need for new engine).

And if we are to discuss BMW's profits, let us not discount the massive production changes and re-orientations that have taken place...a very complex picture. To say they cheapened the car for profits is overly simplistic, imo....all kinds of big stuff is going on that can immensely effect the bottom line.

R56 will probably be a car that more average drivers will like. I submit that is 1) a very good thing and 2) a very Mini thing. It's a Mini...a very good and capable car for real people to drive and use. What folks do beyond that point is up to them....it can be a pocket rocket, but it needn't universally come out of the factory that way. R56 is a production car strong in all the essentials (and a bit more)....beyond that is up to the owner and fortunately, many options exist for this.

 

i think the criticzm in this thread (and elsewhere, either in the press or this site) is fairminded, and the disappointment regarding the (extreme) steps bmw has taken, which both dilute the individuality of the mini-- (but while i feel, will broaden its appeal to a more mass-market demo)-- but in parallel make it less appealing to many "mini-enthusiasts," is well-founded.

after viewing the video link posted above, my disappointments seem to have been confirmed. i really, really dislike the r56 even more, "in the flesh." the (standard) mini appears to me very "bug eyed" and has lost a tremendous deal of its "personality." i am even more shocked after seeing the video! the lights and trim in particular are clumsy and out of proportion, (and the incredibly lame justification by bmw that the larger lights "optically offset" the growth in size is proved), and oddly, the trademard grill seems smaller and less dominant. overall, the car just seems to "sit there" and to me doesn't even "look" like it would handle well. it seem very victimized by the re-design, more than "moving forward" as we would have hoped.

i would also point out that i DO like the seeming "exclusivity" of the mini, (that is a prime factor in its success, many of its buyers appreciating (beyond it being a great car) being able to stay on the cusp of its discovery, and how well it speaks for our personality, etc.-- (and personally, FINALLY being able, after more than three decades, to finally again own a british car!). i don't want to impress that i see it as a "club" deriding the arrival of "downmarket buyers!" not at all. i want the brand to succeed, just not be "diluted." bmw can make all the money it wants, without mass-marketing the car.

 

We all know what opinions are like, and we all have one.... I myself have a 2006 MCS and love it! Four or five years from now I'll get a r56 and love it!

 

I think the statement that the changes "dilute the individuality" are a highly personal assessment, and as such have little meaning in a broad sense. The car design remains highly individual, and highly distinguishable from other autos.

The thing that may broaden the market is the fact that the suspension provides a more comfortable ride without performance compromise. That will draw in people that would otherwise find the harshness unacceptable. Even so its a small slice of buyers that would even consider this car and would pass because of the ride.

My own prediction. Nothing will change. Mini will sell more because the demand is there, and they are building more. People with R56 denial will claim its because the design went mainstream...

 

Oh, it'll sell well - that's a given. Unfortunately sales popularity counts for naught.

Remember; God is in the details. And while the redesign captures the broader MINI 'look', it prays at a wholly different church.

 

prays at a different church?

Pardon me, but that went clear over my head. Care to decode that for us?

 

MINI is never going to be a mainstream car--the masses have no need for a true mini-car with such obviously limited space, and the SUV and truck loving populace doesn't understand the MINI's extremely good handling. The converted and the already knowing will eventually embrace the new MINI because it IS a MINI. There's just been a little facelift, but it remains a MINI!

I almost think there is fear of loss of individuality--a fear of the masses taking over.

Yes, I have an R56 on order, but I'm well familiar with the R53 and previous models--my daughter and son-in-law have two of them, and I watched them race back in the 70's. There were about 25 MINIs at our local club meeting this past weekend. I look forward to more when the new ones arrive on these shores, but I doubt this number will double any time soon.

 

I ordered a new MCS 2 weeks ago. I guess to some here I'm one of the mainstream suckers. Coming to a forum should not turn new members off. I've read people write that in essence anyone without a high thread count doesn't know what they are talking about and now that my passion for the new MCS I have on order is niave. If exclusivity is what is the MINi name is about then contributers to this forum may get what all the exclusivity they want. New "enthusiasts" will not come here if they are made to feel "lesser than" If inclusion is not part of this "club" then maybe I for one may be in the wrong club. I really don't want and reading threads which usually drain down to the bastardization of the legacy. It's really getting annoying being called the future owner of a lesser breed.
Maybe I just need a nap!

 

I tend to believe you.

Some of the existing R50/53 enthusiasts will stick with what they've got, or eventually move on to somthing else (another brand, I mean)... new R56 buyers/owners/enthusiasts will appear and take the place of those few who go away (slowly working their post counts into quadrouple digits ).

Others will just accept that the R56 MINI is a MINI after all... and MINI Motoring isn't as much about the cars (Works or MCS or MC, auto or manual, convertible hardtop or sunroof, SC or turbo etc.) as the attitude of the drivers themselves. (WHO WANTS A HUG! )

Granted this vein does spurt some of the more entertaining discussions that pop up here on NAM. Terribly easy to get sucked into . It would be sad not to have people with their own die-hard opinions on models, features, accessiories, right?

As far as MINI going mainstream, I somewhat disagree. Though efforts have been made to make the car more appealing to a broader market (softer ride comes to mind), there are options and accessioris that allow a new buyer to "sharpen that edge" on the car they spec out. Styling can be debated, too... but again: Where you loose a few you gain a few and others will come around slowly.

It's also been well documented that BMW intendes to continue to limit overall production of the MINI. Thereby inflating demand as well as purchase and resale value. According to their own corprate projections they do not intend to make more money by making the Cooper a million-unit-a-year product (like VW). Instead they have made the choice to increse profit by reducing the costs of production. Despite making it cheaper to build, most people who have experienced the new car in person have commented on an increase in overall build quality. That's pretty impressive when you think about it.

No, the sky is not falling in the MINI world.

OK, I'm done... for now.

(now, what's my post count at? )

 

i agree with designerMINI on this one.

when (i was younger), it seemed to me that one of the selling points of the vw bug was that it virtually never changed. this meant that you could own the car for years, and yet it never appeared "old" or out of date. there was a certain value in this, (and the resulting ease/availability of parts and acessories, etc.), and certainly it contributed to the car's success for many years.

of course this would not wash today, obviously, most of us are bored with and want the newest cell phone six months after we just change models every couple of years. while the mini as well went for 40 years with shockingly little change, (happily so, don't you think?), bmw rightly observes that remaining stagnant in design will not work. the comment above in this thread, that the "timing is right" for a re-do, i think is accurate and perceptive.

of course i want to "return to the 60s," sure-- but that does not mean i want a "retro-car," and thankfully, bmw has avoided that. the new mustang just makes me embarrassed, showing how bankrupt of ideas detroit now is. we can lament all we want about what used to be, (i've complained about the lack of separate running/turn indicators, etc.), and make excuses, ("nobody notices" is a familiar reply), and it is true, while most modernization in auto design is cost centered, even the bentley today, just has no chrome! i for one, was particularly pleased that bmw's original design team focused on including chrome in the exterior body.

attacking an opinion on this forum based on thread/comment counts, i agree, says more about the attacker than the contributer. i hope that other contributers provided this for designerMINI.

my point has always been that the redesign, focused on costs as it is, seems to show-- that is what i disagree with. i can persoanlize my new mini, for sure, but i can't disguise that many of the changes affect the basic look of the car itself.

when i go ahead and purchase an r56, i will post here, so that of course, everyone can contribute in a well-deserved slap down!

 

Even if BMW had desired to keep the car the same for 40years it would have been cut short by regulation. So the redesign was unavoidable. It may have been BMWs practice to periodically redesign anyway - they do it with their own cars. Your assertion that the redesign was focused on cost is unsupported. This may be your impression, but it wreaks of prejudice. Any improvement in manufacturing efficiency can be pointed to and called cost reduction. You choose to connect your interpretation to changes in the design that you don't like. Thats fine, I hope your old mini lasts forever. BMW has used this as an opportunity to improve the car in every way, yes, even in its appearance, to some people at least. Some of that is subjective, but much of it is objective HP, MPG, etc.

The car becomes more and more pleasing to me everyday. And if regulations don't impose again this may be the MINI for the next 40 years.

 

I think the detour this thread has taken says a lot about the changes in the current design. To my eye the design is a very close update and an obvious attempt by BMW to change very little of the overall look of the MINI. When you consider BMW redesigned every panel the design is remarkably simuliar. I can not think of another model/manufacturer that when given the opportunity to make changes to every panel would not have made massive changes. I think that says so much for the iconic nature of MINI, and about the respect that BMW had for the 1 gen model (R53).
I understand fully why some people are passionate about the current changes and I think that is great. The critique is absolutely welcome (IMHO) and expected. But to criticize anyone who wants one is just silly and completely unproductive.
The interesting thing is that I have not read any posts by potential R56 owners berating the former model or their owners motivation. (please PM me if I missed a post)
Being open-minded may have something to do with their desire to get the new model and the fact that they have not needed to crisize the R53 design or their owners.
Has this thread taken the turn it has because the changes were pretty much discussed in the first few pages and now whats left to talk about is why the changes were made and the motivation for those changes? --- Maybe.
Seems to me if the changes were massive everyone would be talking about that instead.

 

Perhaps it's because this has been discussed to death in multiple threads, and perhaps many (new) posters do not read (completely) through this, or the other threads because it takes too much time.

Of course, each of us is not only entitled to our opinion, but also the right to express it, which is cool. What gets me, though, on both sides of the 'argument,' is when people say (write). 'everyone.' It's almost never 'everyone.' It's a group, a bunch, a few, several, many, etc., but it's never 'everyone.' It's not even 'most,' because that would imply a majority - more than half, and there really isn't even an accurate way to know _that_!

 

There may be many people who are not thrilled about the R56, but there are only a few that can not hold back from expressing it. And within that small set there are a few that are derogatory, either subtly or strongly, purposely or completely unaware that they may be offending an R56 buyer.

Say it once, fine, but then drop it - returning to dole out more criticism in the guise of "free expression" is only divisive. The old car has no monopoly on the motoring spirit of Mini. Just get over it already - you are lucky enough to have a collectors item. Some of us prefer the new qualities that have been brought to the table in the new car.

 

Very little of what's been written has been cruel or pointedly derogatory, yet most of the reactions have been ridiculous; ranging from extreme indignation to deflections of 'jealousy'. If R56 buyers are getting offended at people offering a design critique of the new model in a thread dedicated to a visual comparison between the two - then they shouldn't keep reading the thread. Maybe we can move it to the R53 forum?

 

Why don't we discuss the design differences. That is all I'm saying. Design differences to the car not differences in the people who like them or the Legacy of MINI. All of those issues can be (and have been) incendiary and should be discussed but wrapping them all into VISUAL comparisons seems like too many issues for one thread. It seemds to me a discussion about the Visual differences ids seperate (although related) than the potential effect of the design changes (mabe another thread).
Does that make sense?

 

Agreed.

If the new car is hideous then so is the old one. They are so darn close how can one be hideous while the other is not?

I like them all just fine ...but hope to like my R56 MCS best.



dean.

 

I don't think people are getting offended by a design critique. I think people are getting offended by suggestions that the R56 has harmed the brand (as in "diluted"), or that it is contrary to Mini values (implying change for change sake). Homme's comment on "praying at a different church" - again I don't know what to make of that? Are you simply saying the design pursues different goals, or are you saying the car is mass market, or cheap or whatever? I mean come on? That is not a design critique.

These individuals are out of step with the state of mind here and a little pressure from peers is needed to get the message across. I've tried to use humor and sarcasm but my reaction to these sentiments has been hardly ridiculous. As stated elsewhere on the forum these individuals are taking the wind out of the sails of a lot of new enthusiasts. I'm quite certain that this is not what NAM is about.

 

Homme, please read back some posts. Your assesment of what r56ers are concerned about in this thread is absolutely wrong.
Ignorance is blind but I'm assuming you are not. I find its always best to open your eyes before I open your mouth -- doesn't that sould like a good idea?
I do NOT appreciate the suggestion that if I don't like what I read here I should stop reading. If everyone did that the threads would be bare.
In my opinion I like both designs I have not read an individual that has suggested that anyone should be jealous of anyone -- I have read anti-R59ers suggest that pro R56ers were saying that -- maybe those posters should consider their motivation for making such accusations.
It reminds me of the "I know you are but what am I" retort.
Is it possible to agree to disagree and discuss the sytle.

 

I dunno, if you get the reference you get the comment. If you don't get the reference, you're probably not really the intended audience (Reinforced by your belief that it wasn't a design critique in the first place).

I think it's ridiculous to stifle dissenting opinions on minor and more-or-less meaningless details. That people don't like the side-markers is not the end of the world, and not worthy of censure.

Anyway no worries mate. We can agree to disagree. I dislike a couple bits of plastic. You dislike that I harbour dislike.

 

Homme, I care not what you like or dislike. My problem with you is that you frame your criticism with issues larger than the context of the car, which alienates people and works against the community. I'm all for critiquing the design - you were the one that spoke of praying in the church - not bits of plastic. No stifling from me. Dissenting opinions are welcome, encouraged, valued. If your comment really was not meant as a slight to a portion of the community here then you should have no problem explaining it. Please do. By all means, let's hear about the bits of plastic.

 

Things I like:
Jettisoning the wrap-around rear glass. What a pointless detail, and who wants to see not-quite-black painted glass? And how nice would this detail be if it were body coloured? It would actually better mimic the roofline of the classic Mini.

New grill. Finally gets it right, shape and all. The chrome surround on the lower grill in the S is super lux.

The new sunroof.

The bulkiness of the front. Maybe not the shape though.



Things I dislike (shield your eyes faint of heart):
The new side-repeaters. I'm sure some really amazing aftermarket ones will be released. I hope.

Front wheel-arch gap. Both the close-gap from the hood, and the gap between tire and arch (which seems a LOT bigger in the front than in back).

The A-Piller, scuttle area, hood seam. I realise they had to modify this for pedestrian safety standards, but the solution is so generic and so clumsy - especially when the preceding sheet metal was really, really beautiful in this area.

The interior. Yikes. Strike two. Neither of the interiors, old or new, do much for me. The cheap, ugly, tackly silver switch gear kills me. It really does. Even if they've changed it to feel more substantial, it still looks cheap from near or far - silver plastic can't help but look that. I'm glad they changed the stalks to black, but it's a shame they replaced those super-cheap feeling/looking dials with super-stupid looking rotors.

 

*shrug*

You don't understand a comment, so you instantly assume it's derogatory. Frankly if you're going to be that antagonistic, I'd rather not explain anything for you.

 

I want to try to put this back on topic, and I invite Homme and Vlad to talk about the substance of the car - and drop the larger references.

--
edit - just noticed you did the same above - thank you
--

One aspect of the redesign that I feel was not successful is the panel below the rear bumper of the S. I find the R53s treatment much nicer for some reason - it has two rectangular horizontal recess on either side of the exhaust. In the R56 there is one black panel, oddly shaped, that stretches the entire width. It is also very much at the surface. It seems a different language than say the same area at the front where the lower grill is deeply recessed. Perhaps there is something behind the bumper that prevents it, but I think that the simple treatment on the Cooper feels better to me. And, well, the aero package is too much for me, although it is fun.

What do you make of this detail?