R56 for sure, here's some reasons: all aluminum turbo charged direct injection engine, aluminum rear suspension links, JCW brakes as standard, better interior, etc.

 

That can be had, for a price. Same wheelbase and track on a lighter car to begin with, so the basics are there. Play with the ride height first. Get rid of thte runflats next. Camber, caster and toe after... some options on the horizon with solid, or urathane bushings up front to improve stearing feel. The potential is there... you just have to work for it a little.

Not all aluminum... it uses some magnesium in there as well as cast iron sleves for the pistons.

 

old vs new ??0
First few year of MINIs had some problems but by 2005-2006 most problems were worked out.
Some notable ones you'll find by searching in Stock problems and Issues Forum First generation.
Overall the older MINIs are a better value compared to buying new depending on demand in your area, both MC and MCS are found in relative good shape at decent prices. Some are modded and sell for the same price as stock MINIs while others get a premium price- some cabrios, some JCW kit MCS, some GP MINIs. GP MINIs are quite unique, something not yet available for the R56 (too new). Older MINIs has a more balanced and classic look inside and out- but it's all subjective.

new vs old ??
The new R56 is modernized and continues where the R50/R53 left off but not quite in a "straight" line, more different with some oversizing of components compared to the older MINIs- this some people like and others dislike. There are many fewer mods available yet but that will change in time.The R56 MCS is quite capable in stock form and one would be tempted not to change much at least for now, nothing big is really needed unless you enjoy doing some upgrades. One big factor is the new dash has an integrated stereo head unit which needs to be kept, if you want you can add an amp with signal processing and front component speakers, rear speakers and sub woofer with amp. Older MINIs allow for full upgrade of the headunit to DVD/CD headunit with little fuss. Optional interior upholstery and finishes are more elaborate with the R56. Definited try to test drive both versions of MINIs before you decide what direction appeals most to you.

turbo vs blower ??
Turbo gives more low rpm torque and power is ample for most drivers, LSD option helps. Wheelspin is easy with the R56.
Supercharger is very usable and can be easily modded to allow for moderate or better increases in HP.

what's the up's and downs of each??
Gas mileage is a little better with the turbo version.
R56 automatic a little better than the old CVT but there are some problems reported
Older MC (R50) had 5 speed transmission (Midland) problems
Some of the early automatic MCS had problems with transmission.
There are many more suspension mods available for the R50/R53 MINIs.
Prices are still fairly high in some areas for new R56 depending on your area and demand.

surely there are preferences..
Some owners really like one or the other, might as well be to distinct and separate cars from the comments.
Some own one of each- they see pluses and minuses in both, those are the threads to search for.
Some have bought an R56 after owning an R50 or R53, most are happy.

Then there are some color differences with a few colors that were discontinued in the older MINI and some new colors with the R56.

Funtionally both MINIs will work fine for street driving and commuting. In terms of financing you may get a better deal on new car loans and or a lease than with buying a used car. Reliability of the 2005-2006 MINIs is reasonably good.

 

You know a better comparison might have been a 2006 MCS with JCW GP package VS Gabe's 2007 MCS JCW stage1.

I had 2006 R50 (Can't forget your first MINI), and granted if I had the cash right now, it would be difficult to choose between a properly equipt R53 (2006) or build a properly equipt R56. The Chicago and Indy dealers like to put tons of GO SLOW stuff on the cars and ignore the essential GO FAST stuff

 

minihune.... helluva post, GREAT info...

this is actually what prompted my questions, I could get a GP easy enough, but I saw a black w/silver roof '07 w/JCW and my mind went spinning...

one more quick question ?? how much stock boost does the GP make vs the 07 JCW cars??

thanx for all the reply's

 

They have completely different engines: Peugeot/Prince built in UK vs Chrysler/Tritec built in Brazil. It would be like comparing with how much boost a Subaru makes.

 

thanx for the reply, but my question stands merit of an intelligent answer... this isn't my first rodeo..

 

I did not find much written about how much boost each makes but-

http://www.classicdriver.com/uk/maga...0.asp?id=12701
http://www.leftlanenews.com/bmw-to-s...oper-s-gp.html
214-218 bhp original GP, torque of 245Nm
0-62mph in under 6.5 seconds and achieve a top speed of 146mph

2008 R56 MCS Works
http://www.caranddriver.com/autoshow...per-works.html
189 bhp! and 199 ft-lbs torque
Increases of 22 hp and 7 pound-feet, respectively, over a base Cooper S.

The GP lacks a rear seat and is lighter in weight.

A test drive of each would be your best approach.

 

What I was trying to say is that the engines are so different that it isn't meaningful to know that the GP has x amount of boost and the R56 has y amount of boost.

If you were looking for dyno charts, some are here (lots more if you search on "dyno"):
https://www.northamericanmotoring.co...d.php?t=114843

 

Actually yes. We had a 2005 MCSa that was actually totaled when my wife ran over a large piece of wood on the freeway. Front and rear suspension, side airbags and a bent frame put the damage above 60% of the value so it was totaled.

We spec'd a 2007 with as much of the same as possible. Both cars were/are completely loaded. The only appreciable difference is the deletion of the NAV system on the 2007 model as the factory system is cumbersome compared to our many Garmins!

In any case I would have to say that both cars are great...I really mean that

As far as differences the new car does definitely have much more low end torque and does seem a bit more responsive. As far as a daily driver I really don;t see much difference. Believe it or not I really, really miss the large cup holder on the 05 (I know it sounds silly). The 07 is a bot more solid but not really enough to matter. I actually prefer the Harmon Kardon stereo in the 05 to the Boost system in the 07....both cars had the aux connection for MP3 players (But I really hate the fact that neither had a "Mute" button).

The new seats are a bit more comfortable....but again not enough to make me choose one over the other. I like the new cool night lights and the ability to lock/unlock/start the car with the key in my pocket.

All in all the redesign was an upgrade but with the price premium I might think twice about an 05/06 before stepping up for the new car again!

The Wife is happy....so for us this was the right choice!!!

 

Just FYI... those crank numbers are drasticlly underrated. My 2007 JCW put down 180hp and 204lbft (276Nm) of torque... AT THE WHEELS.

A conservative 12-14% conversion for driveline loss comes out between 204-209hp at the crank (versus 189 quoted by MINI).

https://www.northamericanmotoring.co...=120528&page=2

 

Love that. I drove both in a "closed course" situation and while I love my R53 ('06 Checkmate) for it's directness and s-charger whine, I have to admit the R56 MCS has more grunt all over compared to the R53, especially down low.

I've also extensively driven the R56 MC and was impressed. Stock tires and suspension and it retained the go-kart feel of the original new Mini (R50/53). Quieter, stronger, tighter.

R56 interior materials and seats are much improved, the seats are great and the selection, especially that chocolate leather (mmmm looks good enough to eat).

A lot is preference, though. Compared to the R50/53, the R56 has a higher hood and beltline, larger speedo (just when you thought the original was large enough....), non-upgradeable but decent integrated radio head unit, different but still cool interior.

I like my R53 (probably to an unhealthy extent!) and would have a tough choice replacing it. Given the budget to get an equally equipped R56, or a Clubman... it'd be Clubman tied with R53 (practicality has its advantages too), then R56, but it's a matter of degrees.

They'll all be modded anyway!

 

I just had my first service on my late 06 MCS. I got an 07 MCS as a loaner for the day which was my first time with the R56.

First glance- the seats are much better, ergonomics are still good. I do think the interior is a bit over styled-but I could get used to it. I understand the reason for the new headlight design but it does give the car a fisheye effect. I think overall the design conceals the new height requiremnets well.

I noticed the clutch engagement and take up spots are different and don't flow as well-the shifter has a less direct feel as well. Steering is I guess more refined but looses some feel that may appeal to a larger audience.

What's up with the lack of a detent for the turn signal??-that felt kind of weird-the louder,clackier sound of the signal was a little much as well-kind of cartoonish.

I liked the sport button, I felt it made the car sound and handle more like my R53 but why not make it full time?

Overall it's a more refined car, the turbo power is nice and the seats are great. If I was at a BMW/MINI dealer and had to choose between the R56 or spending a little more for a 135i I think I would go with the 135-if fact a well equiped R56 should be right in the same price area as the 128i which maybe a fairer comparison. I like the more direct, aggresive feel of the R53 better than the R56 but I'm not saying the R56 is a bad car-it's a great car.

 

the 53' seems a bit more visceral......

better platform for a hobby car .... (due to all the mods available)

56 more refined ....

the devotees of each model seem to like/love both cars respectively...

I think it is cool that some 56 owners have gone back to 53.....

since mine is a hobby.... I will stay w th 53...

if it was my only car I would get the 56 JMO'

 

Apples vs Oranges.
These cars are clearly different and you are going to find people who like both. To me, it is more of an emotional thing. i think the original R53's will be considered a classic in the future. With the introduction of the the Clubman and the rumored SUV model it takes the Mini brand in a different direction. Gone is a small car is with a lot of personality and uniqueness, much like the original Austin Mini. In comes a more refined car with branding and marketing for a mass market. Nothing wrong with that. It's a business and Mini has to survive and grow. I just have a hard time thinking that I will show up at Mini events and parking next to a station wagon. It sorta loses a bit of the mystique for me.

 

Many of these same sentiments were expressed by Mini owners upon the release of the MINI in 2001-2002. And though most Mini owners have come to accept the "neo" MINI and its owners, don't fool yourself. You would would have a heated debate on your hands at a Mini Meet by the mere suggestion that the BMW/MINI is, or ever will be, a "classic".

Anyway... to suggest that Mini/MINI history revolves solely around the small 2-door hatch is also sort-of silly IMO. Mini (and it's variants) made cabrios, wagons (the Traveller and Countryman), sedans (Riley Elf), pickups, vans, and runabouts (the Moke).

The Mini/MINI "mystique" is less about the specific style of the car and more about the personalities of the people who own and drive it.

 

Great post! You make a lot of sense.

 

I agree with you 100%. While I love the Mini/MINIs one of my first loves are Ford Falcons. Even though I am partial to the Sports Coupes, I also enjoy see and talking about sedans, convertibles, station wagons, panel vans and UTEs (Rancheros). I also dig the fact that Falcons are still being made and enjoyed in Australia, don’t forget Mad Max drove one. http://www.madmaxmovies.com/cars/interceptor/history1.html

So I enjoy driving my ‘07 but also like my wife’s ‘05.

 

went to Lauderdale Mini and test drove an 07 S...

torque steer is interesting

kick a$$ radio..

pretty comfy...

feels *heavier* than the 06's...

 

I should know this, but what is the diff (build dates? ) between r50 and r53?

 

I have been driving my car the last few days and really enjoying it... (I have not been driving it for months) this is one fun car. when i see a 56, and there a a lot in Atlanta, I admire them but I don't think it is the same experience. This is a stretch but think old "Jag" to new. The new ones are far more "sophisticated" ( I used to own a 68' E type) but the old ones get my attention.

I know.... it's a stretch

 

R50 refers to the regular Coopers that were made between '02 and '06, whereas R52 refers to the Cooper S's that were made between '02 and '06. I just found that out yesterday myself by Googling it. For some reason, MINI decided to group both the MC's and MCS's under the same label for the new generations.

FYI, the Cabrios, both MC's and MCS's, are R52's until after '08.

 

You mean R53.

Here's something I posted a while back:See, you also have to be careful not to lump all 2007+ MINIs as R56s, because they aren't. Only the 2007+ coupes are.

 

THANKS...always wondered about that


but my '04MC being a dec 2003 build is an R50 with the midland trans 5speed.....the later 2004's and up have the different trans, but are they the same designation, i.e. R50 even with a different transmission and different taillight assembly?? I always assumed they had a different designation, but I guess not.

 

Actually, it was in the 2005 model year that it was changed. Half-way through a model's product life, BMW & MINI like to do "model refreshes", which are (relatively) minor updates to the model. That's what they did in 2005 for 1st Gen MINIs, and they will also be doing it for 2nd Gen MINIs in 2010 (see this recent article on MotoringFile). However, when they do these refreshes, they do not change the model code, because the changes are really updates, not new models.