I know that the minis are different. But i was wondering the specs wise not looks.. as in what are the length differences? and is it really that much of a difference??

 

Pros and cons to each, I'd say....subtle things.

 

No what im saying is what are the dimensions of the r53 compared to the r56.. like length, height, width.. etc

 

You might want to check on MotoringFile to see the owner's manuals....they'd have one for R53. R56 is there, too, but also at MINIUSA since it's the current model. Not much is made of the dimensions generally because the differences are so miniscule.

 

Ok, so its not a major difference.. just a couple inches wont hurt anyone lol.

 

The length differences aren't huge - three or four inches in length at most, and probably less than that much in any other dimension.

The R56 can look significantly larger than the R53, though, mostly because of its shape. If you compare the front ends of the two, the R56 looks more bulbous and rounded, especially around the headlamps. At the back end, the most-noticeable difference is where the bottom edge of the rear glass meets the hatch. On the R53, the glass is almost flush with the hatch. On the R56, the hatch sheetmetal bulges out noticeably where it meets the glass.

Overall, my impression of the R56 is that it looks like someone stuck an air hose in an R53 and inflated it by a few psi, making it look larger than the changes in dimensions alone would suggest.

 

 

I'd love to have the 53 body on the 56 everything else.

 

Last time I looked most of the dimensions seemed to be to the same, there's just a couple of extra inches in the bumpers at front and back (for some safety mandate), adding up to the 4" of extra length. The major parts of the car are the same size, just different shape.

 

Thanks.. but idk why they would change the supercharger to a turbo, there goes all the whine of the engine that make the car so enjoyable to drive. Oh well...

 

DIDO!!!

 

I think fuel economy and emissions played a big part in the switch to turbo.

 

 

Owning both cars, I'm not sure this image captures it at all. Both cars are great in their own right and look correct each on their own. For sure, there are lists of things I like about each.

 

I've never drivin an r56 but looks wise, I like the interior better for sure, but the exterior IMO the r53 gets the win there. There is nothing outside on the r56 I like better than the 53. Although there are some nice 56s out there, I'd still buy another r53 if I had to re-buy a mini again.

I do like the clubmans though

 

clubmans are a phailure. lul

 

I own a R53 MCS and got a R56 Loaner.

Things I like about the R56:
-More orange interior lighting (door panels, above the seatbelt on the side)
- you can change the lights from orange to pink,purple, and blue. (i prefer orange though)
- The dash itself is nicer
- The seats hug you a little more
-better heated seats
-rear sunroof goes up as well (but not back)
-the Tiptronic (in sport mode) shifts pretty fast and rev matches for you)
-added toggle switches
-Steering definately feels a little tighter (although the handling isnt as good as my MCS)

Things I dont like:
- the car smells like sheap plastic when you step inside
-the speedometer is damn ugly
-the ac controls are cheap looking (not cheap quality though)
-the overall interior just looks cheaper. more of a rubbery plastic feel
- the exterior is no where near as nice as the r53, especially the base cooper.
- its damn slow (coming from a 6 speed MCS owner, so that doesnt mean much)
- Dont like how the headlights and grille do not go up with the hood
-Engine sounds like a groaning piece of crap

Overall I just htink that BMW cheapened the car, not as prestigious looking IMO. I still like the car, and down the road I may end up owning a R56 MCS after I'm done with my R53. But R53 is certainly built alot better (appearence wise)