I am looking at buying a late model Countryman--2014-2015. I have heard not too flattering things about reliability of the Minis. Is this something that is more of an issue with 2013's and earlier or is it still an ongoing issue? I am looking for my son for his first car, so reliability is very important. I'm also looking at getting one for my wife for her weekend car--the large weekday SUV is beginning to bore her. Any advice/insight would be greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance.

Ron

 

My son is getting close to first car age as well.

I understand that reliability is an important issue, but if money is also important, and if I were in your shoes, I think I'd be just as concerned about collision repair costs and insurance premium impact as mechanical issue repair costs. A Cube, Juke, Soul, or xB might be interesting to a teen, with considerably less financial exposure for the new driver, to whom, fender benders are common.

 

It all depends on your kid. A "fast" and fun car is probably a recipe for disaster if you ask me (depending on your teen).

I grew up driving a 1993 Volvo 240 (fun in second, stick) and still managed to grind up an axle, bending rims and generally putting that beast through the wringer. Keep in mind, I was pushing that car to the stock limits and never had a collision with another vehicle.

I also come from a family of car enthusiasts, so learning to drive properly under pressure and at speed was a big deal and something to be learned.

Are you thinking manual? auto? I already burned up a clutch on the CMS, it is too small for the weight, but was replaced under warranty. So that might be a consideration.

MINI's are great cars, but I wouldn't trust a youngster with one for his first car. Get him a beater, teach him how to drive it properly, make him a better driver, the nicer cars will come and he'll appreciate what they are capable of more.

Just my 0.02.

Dailey

 

An unexperience young driver can get into a lot of trouble with a Mini. For my son's first car, I plan on buying him something big and slow

 

As was stated above, a Volvo wagon is an excellent first car. It's engineered with safety in mind, has a low center of gravity, relatively heavy, and oh, so boring. The only risk is that your hot rodder offspring will have such a pent-up need for speed after driving the Swedish Tractor that their second car will be a Fast-n-Furious killer.

 

You roasted a clutch on a 2015 CMS ALL4? I thought they redesigned the clutch to prevent that.

 

Sure did! I'm not sure it was ever engineered to the proper extent. I know they upped it, but it is still weak.

Of course with everything there is a story.

https://www.northamericanmotoring.co...ml#post4048613

There is a lot of stress on the all4 clutch.

 

Up to and including the 2013 models the base Mini was considered the most reliable because it was not a turbo as was the Mini S models. However since then all Mini's are turbo's so there is no longer an advantage to buying the base model.

 

This is incorrect - only the 3rd gen MINIs switched to turbos for the Cooper models. 3rd Gen MINIs currently only consist of the 2014+ Hardtops.

2nd gen MINI Cooper models still use naturally aspirated N14 4-cyl engines. 2nd gen MINIs consist of Countryman, Paceman, and Convertibles up to and including 2015 models.

Aside from that, I wouldn't go so far as to say the Cooper S, or even turbo equipped models are inherently unreliable and I think the majority of Cooper S owners would agree. 2014 and 2015 2nd gen MINIs have had a lot of the kinks worked out over 2011-2012 models where the N18 engine was new.

 

The latest iteration of the Countryman is as reliable as a MINI gets especially in base form. Actually, the Countryman is the best in class IIHS top safety pick.

The unreliable MINIs are the N14 turbo engine models (2007-2010 Cooper S). Timing chains, premature carbon buildup, etc., are issues that were mostly sorted out with the 2011s. The first Countryman was a 2011. The most current refreshed models has more kinks sorted, and refinements were made to the styling.

For a kid's first car, I'd go for the non-S, Countryman automatic. I'd go low on the options to keep the price down. It's almost the equivalent of a 4-door VW Golf. It's on the slow side, but still fun to drive and has a bit of style to (vs a base Carolla or similar)

 

"In Class" are the key words here. What happens to a Mini when it hit a Range Rover head on?

 

Not very many people come onto this or other forums for any product to declare that X is super reliable. They mostly come on and complain about the troubles, so I think you have to discount the info somewhat. CM is a good car, I have a 2011 bought used and have had no issues, the prior owner had the early bugs taken care of.

When I first started driving, cars used to break down all the time, why does this generation of kids have to have perfection in everything? I don't look at the CM as some hot rod performance machine that will get a new driver into trouble. And besides it is the kid driving more so than the car creating issues.

Good luck with your purchase. Would you upgrade mine as long as you are shopping?

 

I agree that the first car should be little more than basic transportation. I also agree that it should have some size to it. I'd recommend a used Subaru Outback if it needs to be a wagon with AWD. Otherwise a used Honda Accord or Toyota Camry would do well. He can aspire to nicer cars when he knows how to drive and pays for the car, maintenance, and insurance himself.

Get your wife a new Countryman.

 

http://www.wreckedexotics.com/head-o...oxster-0011605

considering this happened to that Porsche, I would imagine you'd be pretty much ash. If I hit you in my old Rover, I would have just end up sitting on your head.

Also, we should never have to rely on the safety of a car's disaster response system. A properly trained driver should 9 time out 10 be able to avert crisis, imho .

 

I've been a longtime member of the forum, and I've clearly noticed that with each succeeding model year fewer and fewer problems with the Countryman are reported.

Yes, the owners of 2011's and 2012's have had widespread problems. Sure there are some owners who have had no problems...thankfully the failure rates never approached 100%. If someone tries to dispute that, all you have to do is go back to the posts on this forum during that timeframe and you can clearly see it.

But the good news is that the situation has seemed to improve with each subsequent model year, especially starting with 2013 when BMW made a bunch of updates to the CM.

We owned a 2012 that had kept blowing fuel pump and fuel injection fuses. The car had to be towed to the dealer multiple times. The dealer could never figure out what the cause was. We finally started carrying spare fuses...a laughable solution, eh?

Under threat of a lemon law action BMW/Mini replaced the 2012 with a new 2013, and our experience with the replacement 2013 (now at 38k miles) has been far better. After owning the two cars back to back, it seems to be very obvious that the build quality substantially improved in 2013 with the changes they made to the car (it's obvious in things even like the switchgear).

With the 2013, at 8k miles there was a noise coming from the front axle that turned out to be a cracked wheel bearing, and the drivers lumbar broke at 18k miles. The lumbar seems to be a common problem as several others here have reported it, and the fact that the dealer would keep these parts in stock seems to be another indication that the problem is common.

The good news is that we have had no new problems in the last 20,000 miles.

 

Have you watched these tests? They are running them into walls....

I'm pretty sure, rugged as Range Rovers are, that a wall is sturdier

 

Take a look at this video, you will have a better understanding of in class safety ratings.

http://www.iihs.org/iihs/news/deskto...onomy-policies

 

Interesting article and I see what you're trying to say about best in class. And I now get what you're trying to say about what would happen in a collision involving a MINI and a bigger car like the Range Rover.

What would happen is that the Countryman will protect you better than most other cars people would usually cross shop the CM with.

Would I be safer in a Range Rover? Probably. I'd be even safer in an armored car too. I guess the point I'm trying to make is that having better crash ratings over most other cars you would normally compare it to, is not worth dismissing.

 

Sometimes having a good crash rating can give people a false sense of security. If I was driving my Mini on a road with all compact cars, then that sense of security is realized. In the real world, the Mini is usually one of the smallest car on the road. Personally, I would feel safer in a large car with a bad safety rating than a compact car with good safety ratings, there is simply no getting around the law of physics.

 

I disagree. You don't get to pick who/what you crash into or how. I would rather be in the car that gives me the best chance to walk away from in all scenarios. If you were in a truck, with a poor safety rating let's say, and you crashed into another truck with better safety ratings, who has a better chance of walking away?

I'm reminded of crash test videos of the F150 (albeit an older model) where the truck buckled in on itself and the all the trim pieces flew off and were bouncing around inside the cabin.

Of course, to be fair, I live in Seattle. If I lived somewhere like Texas, where it seems to be some sort of rule you have to drive a big truck, my perception may be different.