I've been reading more and more "long-term" reports of our car lately, and they're not so sweet. Check out this one:

http://www.autoweek.com/article/2011...IEWS/111119858

The sad thing is, I agree with some of the comments. I can put up with MINI's quirky ergonomics (I'm accustomed to them and fit well in the car), and love all the fun and techy features. The manual trans feels great, but the car needs to be revved too much to take off smoothly (like any MINI I've ever driven), and let's admit it: The ride on anything but mirror-smooth roads SUCKS--at least it does with my 18" run-flat, sport suspended AWD Cooper S.

Will I regret my 4 year lease that prevents me from getting that Land Rover Evoque? Probably not; I really do enjoy the car, but I feel the need to explain to friends in the back that the ride IS stiff, but the car is fun and useful for me.

I wonder how, or if, MINI will respond to these comments from different reviewers. Will there be suspension or tire changes for '13?

What do you think?

 

It's interesting...one of the things that convinced me to "sign on the line" for the MINI Im awaiting was the fact that I could feel the road in it...but since I've ordered mine at least three friends have basically said "Why? Those things ride sooo rough!" If I wanted something that rode like a pillow, Id get some geezer pleaser like a Toyota Avalon. Point being, a lot of the things that reviewers knock the MINIs for are the exact things that endeared it to me.

 

You shoul have test drove it more befor committing. Every car is not perfect.

 

I agree with many of the comments. The VW was better finished. The CM4 is about 600 pounds more than the MCS, and it was less zippy. Starting off the line with the manual transmission is less exhilarating than the Clubman or MCS.

But it also seats four comfortably for long trips (tested twice so far). We wanted AWD and the ALL4 seems to work great so far - especially compared with RAV4 and CRV. Mileage is OK. And four doors on a MINI was the right choice for us.

 

The big issues seemed to be the rough ride but there's an easy solution for that - non-RF's. I'm waiting for my MCS and there are four new non-RF's (Conti Extreme Contact DWS) out in my garage also waiting for it. Run flats off day one, problem solved.

 

i read the review and the comments and here is my take...
before buying i did a lot of research, defined my criteria and identified cars that met the criteria. for examples, what is my purpose for this car - primarily a commuter car in massachusetts with busy streets and highways, so i wanted a smaller car. in terms of spunk versus mpg - i test drove both the S and the non-S, and opted for better gas mileage than giddy up since it will be taking just me from home to work (80% of the time), i also thought about buying a car in its first year (which im not a fan of due to the usual first year reliability issues), so i waited to order a 2012 (besides i like the bench suits my needs better), also looked at the warranty which provides protection for 4 years. additionally, i wanted comfort over the ability to push it hard into corners, so i got the stock 17 inch tires without the sports suspension. insofar as looks, i wanted something that personally looks good and that i can identify easily when i come out of a store...too many japanese and korean cars are looking alike. i wanted to stay under 30k and with discounts and motor-tober i did just that. other than the current quality issues, which bmw / mini really needs to keep a close eye on and be proactive in correcting, there should be no surprises to customers who do their homework....and why wouldnt one spending that kind of cash-ola? since one car will never satisfy everyones needs, the other family car should be the one that does....just some morning thoughts while drinking some strong java.

 

All good comments. FWIW, I did do my homework. I knew what I was getting into, and would not have done things differently. I owned an '02 Cooper S and am well aware of the choppy ride issues. I might change the tires to non-RFs when these are shot, if not sooner.

 

i told you the my java was strong lol..didnt mean to imply that you didnt do your homework, so sorry about that. i personally wouldn't take my countryman (if it ever arrives) across country or any extended journay...i would rent a big luxury car or minivan for that...at the sake of repeating myself, for me this will be mainly a fun commuter car with good gas mileage and in my opinion sharp looks...and this being my first mini, i expect to enjoy it for what i built it to be.

 

The funny thing is we all knew what we were getting into buying this car. For around 30 grand we could have bought a lot of different cars but we bought this one because we liked it. We can fix the little things wrong with it like the run flats. I for one am very happy with the car and wouldn't hesitate to buy another one. At the end of the day all that matters is that I'm happy not what people that don't even own one think about it.

 

[RANT]

IMHO...

It seems that there are two "perspectives" from which one can consider the Countryman as a total package:

1. A small X-over trying to blend with a sports car;
2. A sports car trying to blend with an X-over.

These perspectives are fundamentally different as they have two entirely different starting points (value propositions).

A small X-over puts a premium on space and convenience while trying to offer fuel economy and a reasonably comfortable, car-like ride. A sports car emphasizes handling, power, proper gear ratios, and a rewarding (though not necessarily "plush") driving experience; space is a minor consideration.

My MCS-JCW fits well into the "sports car" category; it is everything I want (except RWD) in a track car and never fails to entertain me on the road. It holds just enough for a comfortable 2-week road trip and makes for a very entertaining experience on rural roads through mountains and the countryside.

So, did my expectations "scale-up" the MCS for the Countryman? Can the laws of physics (higher CoG, more weight, etc.) be repealed in order to allow the Countryman to behave exactly like the MCS?

IMHO, it seems to me that MINI created the Countryman from the first perspective: a small X-over trying to blend with a sports car. However, one must recognize that the Countryman design is saddled by the laws of physics; duplicating the MCS experience in a larger, higher, heavier vehicle seems to be at odds with the reality of the design.

Therefore, I find comparisons of the Countryman with MINI's other stablemates to be an exercise of little relevance. It is what it is...and is isn't an R53 or an R56! The Countryman is a small X-over trying to blend with a sports car with a decidedly MINI flair! I accept it for that and don't give "comparison" reviews against the rest of the MINI line up the time of day. Yes, I'm old and I'm grumpy!

All this being said, the major issue I have with the Countryman and many other vehicles being offered today is the use of run-flat tires...and ridiculous expectations. Everyone knows that a RF sidewall must be very stiff in order for it to do its job when punctured. So on a 50 or 55mm height sidewall, a RF tire will feel very hard even compared with a 60 or 65mm height RF sidewall. Now, reduce the sidewall height down to, say, 45 mm (stock 18" size) and you basically have a concrete doughnut for a tire. But let's not stop there...

Let's add the sport suspension (with its reduced compliance), the heavier weight of the Countryman, and...oh...the concrete doughnuts. Isn't it a no-brainer that the ride will be "harsh" (to put it mildly)? Do people test drive this kind of configuration before they order/buy the car? Why are they surprised?

I like the Countryman's value proposition. I am not expecting it to drive like my MCS-JCW. I will enjoy its additional space, more comfortable interior, and the flexibility it offers when carrying "stuff". I also will enjoy its 17" wheels and the higher sidewalls (compared to 18") of the non-run-flat tires I will be using to replace the OEM RF tires.

[/RANT]

 

It would be good to hear from owners who have already swapped out the run-flats and see how much of a difference it made in the ride quality. I know from personal experience with the first generation MINI's that the car felt totally transformed with just that one change, even with sport suspension on the car.

 

I just swapped out my 17" RF's for non-RF's and the difference is NIGHT AND DAY. No more teeth-rattling and kidney-bruising with every bump in the road.

 

Thanks, hoppes. It looks like the first mod recommendation I always make for the little MINIs holds up for the Countryman. It is amazing what a different pair of sneakers can do for a car.

 

I would agree that the tires are too stiff. Too much road noise is transmitted to the passenger compartment. The throttle is ok, but I think the hill hold, combined with a relatively high 1st gear ratio, make this car exceptionally hard to smoothly launch off the line. I would like to know how to disable the hill-hold feature. The rest of the review is pretty fair.

Other than the absolutely pathetic exterior trim, I love this car. Mine has a bit over 5,000 miles, and I still have no rattles or squeeks. The car tracks fine on long trips, and I love the lounge leather seats. However, after the lack of response from MINI on fixing the trim issue, I do not plan to ever purchase another Mini again.

Mark

 

I'll say the ride is rough one of my mates girlfriends has rather large breasts, last time she was in the car she complained that they were shaken out of her bra. Love it!!!

 

 

Dropping a rim size with non-runflats can also make a WORLD of difference. I notice this every fall when the 17s come off and the 16s go on for the winter. You still feel the bumps, but there is more give.

 

<---- Staying with RFs.

 

now this is a benefit I'm staying with run flats too.

 

I have runflats, 17" rims and a non-sport suspension, and I wouldn't describe the ride as particularly harsh. It's certainly less jaw-rattling than my friend's R53. I never really get it when people say their car rides super harsh.

As far as the review, I take a bit of issue with the comparison to the A3. In the US at least, you cannot have a manual transmission if you want AWD in the A3. It's also a really boring looking car, but perhaps that's a matter of taste. So how is it a legit alternative?

I also don't get "lousy throttle response" as a critique. Put your foot down farther. They keep saying that a blip doesn't rev the RPMs. Blip harder. It's not like the car is particularly slow to rev if you give it the right amount of gas. It just requires a heavier foot. I can get the thing off the line pretty quick if I'm so inclined, and all it takes is an understanding of where the good torque band is. Maybe that's really different than the other cars they're used to, but I don't really have a problem at all with it. It takes about a week to get used to.

I agree with Koopah that if you're reviewing it as a sports car, you'll be disappointed. It just doesn't handle like one, and how could it with the clearance it needs to be a credible AWD crossover? My feeling is that MINI made an amazing set of compromises for this car, and it was able to get a sportier car than most (all?) other crossovers and a more useful, versatile car than any sports car could be.

They took the MINI philosophy and applied it to the crossover concept, and they got a car that fits its niche beautifully. There is no direct alternative to this car in the US except maybe the 2012 Impreza wagon, and even there you can't get the top level trim and keep a manual tranny.

And I really don't get the ride criticism, unless they're test driving the sport suspension. I live on a dirt road off of a badly paved road, and I don't find it jarring at all.

 

The 'poor throttle response' is, in my opinion, because there is not an even feel between clutch engagement, and throttle pickup. Most cars allow you to 'feel the clutch' as you engage the throttle. An even lifiting of the clutch, with a slow increase in throttle, results in a nice smooth start. With the CM, the clutch is difficult to 'feel', the hill hold feature interferes at the wrong time, and the engine doesn't create sufficient torque at low RPM's. Combine that with the heavier weight, and taller gearing, and you get a car that is prone to either stall, or squeel tires, on startup. With the All4, the tires don't squeel, so you either stall, or accelerate rapidly. Very difficult to do smoothly.

Mark

 

I'm really, really far away from being an expert driver, but coming from 9 years in a manual Jeep Liberty, I just don't see the difficulty in getting the thing into first. I did have to learn to ignore hill hold (because it made me feel like I was balancing on the clutch when I actually barely had the clutch out at all), but now that I know the engagement point on the clutch and how far down the throttle needs to be, it's as easy as pie to either get in really low and pull out efficiently or gas the thing and drop it into gear.

I do think the throttle/clutch relationship is a little counterintuitive, since you need to put the throttle down relatively far and the clutch is relatively light and quick to engage. The combination means that you'll likely to underrev and to engage the clutch a little too early (stall) or overcompensate with the throttle and still engage the clutch faster than you intend (leap).

Smooth starts with swift clutching are all about learning the engagement point. The first thing I did with my car was get a really good feel for the engagement point by sitting on flat ground at pure idle and pulling it out until I felt it engage. I wanted a rock-solid feel for that before I tried driving the car more spiritedly.

 

The issue of the new clutch feel was discussed during an interview with USA Product Manager Vinnie Kung, just posted today on www.motoringfile.com

 

Well, I have no major complaints against Zaftig and always give the CM a thumbs up when people ask about it. But, I'd be fibbing if I said it was the funnest car I've ever owned. For as long as I've wanted one, the sad truth may be that I'm just not a MINI person. I've got a couple of years for it to grow on me and I don't see me regretting the decision to buy it. Maybe I need more seat time? I'm not giving up, yet.

Sealy - Who still rues the day he traded in his Mazda3 grand touring hatch

 

We ordered a MINI Cooper Countryman S and a MINI Cooper Countryman S All-4 today. We're going from an '09 and '08 MINI Cooper S Hardtops. These cars are not for everyone. These will be MINI's #5 and #6 for us so needless to say we have an affinity for the brand. I've heard all kinds of negative comments since '02 when the MINI brand was first brought back to the USA and I have never once expected anyone let that affect me. I dont expect anyone to adopt my opinion for their own and in return I'm open to other people's opinions but they are simply that - their opinion. Just my 2¢. Dn't let it get you bent out of shape or make it question your buying decision.