Actually, it was effective with July 2004 builds.

 

that was my thinking also that the transmissions changed later, in the 2004 model year


edit: oops...just read the article....states the change was in 2004, when I read about it, but for the 2005 model

 

...which became 2005 model year cars.

I was taking about model year not actual build date.

 

I know im a bit late to this but i saw it and had to respond.

The R53 is already a compromised design (albeit a great compromise). As is the case with any retro design, like the new beetle for instance. It would make no sense to produce a car that simply held itself to the priciples of its original concept. As is the case with both the mini and new beetle, the spirit of the car is there and that's what really matters.
Having owned a classic MINI (early 80's Leyland Mini, complete with 10 inch rims) i can say that my 03 without question has the spirit of that car. It reminds me a lot of that car, only newer and fancier. it has a surprising amount of room. it has a very open interior and best of all drives like a kart, feels like you are inches from the tarmac, and it makes you feel everything that passes under the tires.
My classic mini didnt go fast, but it was always a great drive.

To me the R56 is by default a compromise on a compromise.

The changes to the exterior, to some are minimal. They may even have made the car more attractive or easier to like to a broader range of consumer. I have no doubt that it has its upside when it comes to performance, But its those small design changes that make the difference to me. They translate to a bigger loss of charachter.


The minute i saw the R53 in the press 7 or so years ago, i fell in love. I was so pleased they were making it and giddy that it would be for sale in the U.S. I wanted one immediately. I "built my own" on line about a thousand times. I have had several cars over the years, but the MINI never lost its appeal to me. I finally bought a used one last summer, and i look forward to driving it every time.

When i first saw the R56, my heart sank. I thought they had just chosen an inexperienced car photographer. "it must look better in real life" i thought. "it cant really look like that". I wanted it so much to be as good or better than the R53.

Then i went to the dealership and saw it for myself. The guy asked me what i thought of it and i said, in all sincerity- "they've ruined it."
When i looked inside, my sadness grew. I couldnt believe how big the speedo had gotten. What was an interesting, but respectful nod to the past has become a charicature of itself.

Even the 17 inch crown spoke rims look cheaper. Their design influence was the classic mini-lite rim: A small but tough wheel made for racing. They have lost some of their heft. the spokes used to look chunky and substantial. Now they look like a cheap knock-off.

To me it looks like the R53 and R56 were designed by two seperate groups of people.
The R53 seems like it was designed by people whose parents had MINIs.
The R56 looks like it was designed by a division of Toyota.

I say get a low mileage R53. Add a JCW kit when you can and you'll never want to give it up.

Just my opinion.

 

MKIIR53 - I think your post puts specific examples to the sense many people get after looking at the R56, even though everyone isn't able to verbalize it as you have. Thanks!

mb

 

See....these threads always wind up the same, perhaps it's just the natural course of things. Some prefer one, some prefer another....simple as that. I can guarantee that both cars have plenty of character, and I can also state from my own R56 motoring that nothing has been "ruined" at all. The two cars do have some subtle differences, though, and that's why test drives are essential....multiple test drives are even better!! "The numbers" don't tell the whole story.

 

I'm not sure I understand the *ruined* theory...

how would YOU have done it differently to retain the *character* you speak of...

how do you *ruin* something that's been defined and refined??

 

I'm guessing most traditionalist folks don't like the fact that the MINI has been rounded out quite a bit in the front and the dimensions overall were increased. I never really noticed how different they were before I got my car and joined NAM. Now that I've been looking at and drooling over pictures of other peoples' cars, it's pretty apparent that several things have been bulked. I'm beginning to prefer the sleeker look of the R53, from the slimmer bonnet to the more streamlined back panel windows. I suppose the larger dimensions do make them more appealing to a wider audience, but there are a few features I'm beginning to regret (huge speedo, non-changeable radio, etc).

 

The problem is that the R53 design vocabulary was so damn perfect, that any deviation from it would automatically "ruin"the concept, sort of speak. I think the R56 interior tries too hard to be cool and hip. Not so with the R53 interior, where every element has a specific function and at the same time, it has that timeless simplistic design approach to it (But still manages to be retro and quirky). In the R56 the design team decided that, for the sake of change, they would make the interior look more like a caricature. In other words, instead of following what would have been the natural evolution of the MINI interior, they decided to become interior decorators. They plastered a huge speedo that is overwhelming in the cabin. Then another design committee saw it fit to create a center console that has no flow, no relationship with the rest of the dashboard. There is a huge sense of disconnection, in terms of design and purpose, when you look at the R56 inside and out. Hey I am getting a Clubman, and I will live with some of the interior irritants that I have described above, but exteriorwise, the Clubman addresses many of the issues I have with the R56, specifically, from the sides and the rear of the car. Sorry guys, but I do not like one bit the butt of the R56, be it MC or MCS with or without the JCW aero kit. There is something about that bubble but that simply does not work (And I like other bubble butts, but we will not get into that sort of talk here). I have owned 3 R53 era cars. I love my '05 R53 S and I plan to keep it for as long as I possibly can. The perceived speed, refinement and newess of the R56 simply are not enough of a hook for me to let go of my R53. I think BMW did a terrific job with the R53 development back in the 1990's. They did truly develop a car that was and still is, way ahead of its time... In other words a classic. We'll see how I "warm up"to the R55 Clubman interior, but I suspect I will continue to cherish the superb Frank Stephenson designed interior of my r53 for years, and why not, decades to come.

 

I think the integrated radio was a really lousy move. I am not the type of person that installs aftermarket stereos, but I like th efact that in the R53 you have this solid state, single radio unit that can be yanked out, if so desired, and there is no need to compromise the speedo in any way. But what bothers me most, is the fact that the huge speedo of the R56 doesn't even have a water temp gauge, an essential item in a turbocharged car.

 

I'm not sure I do either, especially as it relates to cosmetic changes....but it would seem that in addition to this, certain differences in the ride quality/feel between R53 and R56 would have some thinking that the change has done away w/ something uniquly visceral that they liked/prefer in R53. Whether one agrees or disagrees, it is a fact that these two views exist in the MINI community, and perhaps rightly so. By the same token, some of this change seemingly originated with negative R53 customer feedback and the need to better adjust the car for runflat use. Some have found R56 even more compliant, although less visceral, when pushed hard. I think "ruined" is a bit unfair...but it's unavoidable that someone is going to express their views this way.

Most it seems would have wanted R53 left unchanged cosmetically and/or ride-quality wise. Without a doubt, MINI was not in a position to do this, both because of European regulations, and because (I think) BMW knew it could make a more compliant, yet equally sporty suspension in the BMW-style. It would be better, addressing customer complaints, and sell more MINIs...but many R53 owners actually liked the previous suspension better and had great success tuning it. They would not see the change as something suited to them.

Seems this way, but for certain enthusiasts once a definition is defined, that's it!!! It's happened this way with Miatas, and BMWs, and Porsches...etc, etc. It's happening with MINIs now, too. Most of this can/should be ignored, though as chatter, even though valid point may be gleaned form the discussion.

All this is relevant, I feel, to the OPs initial inquiry, and there are many, many posts/discussions on all this. It is rather interesting, and a little disturbing, but if one can get past that, it's just a bunch of folks passionate about their cars.

As I said...having spent seven in an R56 Cooper...I find the car to be just as superb as the previous Cooper, although I do recognize the differences and can see the attraction to the previous model. However, the differences I note actually make the car even better for me, and so yes, I prefer the R56 and appreciate the tweaks/refinements.

 

that's a VERY good point, and one i've not read elsewhere...

 

I am not a designer by trade, but in my head I can picture hundreds of different interiors that could have gone into the R56 cabin and still look great without the current comic-cartoonish look and feel. I believe Gert Hildebrand (Head of MINI Design in Germany) is a great human being and he genuinely cares about the MINI brand he has been entrusted with.... But in my brutal opinion, the man doesn't have half the design talent, vision (or cojones for that matter) of his predecessor. My faith in Mr. Hildebrand has been restored a bit with the Clubman design work, but he is not (and probably will never be) among the top 10 auto designers of all time (Such honor has been bestowed to Frank Stephenson by the way).

 

Let me throw another minor but very significant design change in the R56..... The lack of height adjustable front seat belts. I mean... did the cost cutting of the new generation had to go this far? In the R53, you can height adjust both front seat belts. In the R56 they are fixed. Some owners have complained about this problem. I can imagine the conversation between the BMW bean counters and marketeers when the R56 was still being developed.."You take your pick...It will either be the telescopic steering wheel or the height adjustable front seat belts. But you can't have both!!! Pick your poison sort of deal.

 

I would disagree. For those used to seeing the traditional parcel shelf dash arrangement on a classic Mini, the new interior, borrowing from that, looks right at home. I think there's much more of that influence going on than a hip-style thing. That's how I've always seen it anyway, and so it's no shock that I have no problem with it. Add to that improvement in virtually all materials. R50/53 is not (by a long shot) the only valid iteration of a MINI interior. Driving an R56 everyday...the remainder of the interior is almost pure function.

The aerodynamics of R56 are improved in a measure few appreciate. Thank the boot, the c-pillar profiles, and the spoiler profiles for some of that...at least in back. Folks actually experimented w/ some of this in the first-gen car, but it's part of R56 design. I'm not saying it might look different/odd to some...but understanding the benefit sometimes helps. I love it!!!

I'd like some gauges, too (hopefully better than R50/53's), but I also do really like being able to display OBC information on the speedo/radio display, not just on the tach because I like the tach set to the one mode I find most useful for motoring. In fact, I'd love even more info available for display in the speedo/radio display. If this were the case, they can forget the gauges. In R50 the radio readout was radio-only...in R56 it's more than that. The flexibility (and potential) is fantastic!

 

First of all I am a car enthusiast, not a car designer, so I would not have done anything.

Second, if I were a car designer i would have left it alone on the outside.

Thirdly, like I said, this is my opinion. Not a theory. Those are two different things. And i believe the inital question was one regarding opinions.

My opinion is completely based on experience and personal preference. Refinement is a subjective marketing term. Much like the term "sophistication".
Something is only as refined as you think it is. Some people think Donald Trump's interior design tastes are "refined". I think they are garish. However, that does not make his taste garish, it is simply a difference of opinion.
There are plenty of examples, especially in automotive design of "refinement" as justification for change. Jaguars are supposedly more refined now than they used to be. If you like your Jaguar to look more like a Taurus and less like a Jaguar, then you would think of them perhaps as being refined.

My preference just happens to be for something that reminds me more of the brand i liked in the first place.

Additionaly, some of the performance changes to the car as i have stated are probably for the better, i cant really say, but the cosmetic changes were not made, on the whole because they wanted to, they were made to adhere to more stringent guidelines. Car makers are often forced to change that which they would normally leave alone, for reasons that are beyond their control.

Apparently the bonnet was rased on the R56 to satisfy some safety rquirement as it pertains to hitting pedestrians. Not because they thought it would look better. One of the particular characteristics that make it less indicative of the original car, to me.

If i was to be run down by a car, i would choose to be run down by an R53.

 

So a Clubman addresses aesthetic issues that an R56 has? Wow, I didn't see that coming. How about all the ones it raises?

 

While I would buy an r56 engine in a r53 body in a second, I understand that MINI had to make something new, even though in some pictures you can't tell the differences, as an owner you see a huge difference.

The MINI brand needs to progress, and build on the r53's success. While I'm not a big fan of where they've been going with their cars, the r56 has been selling well for them and the brand is making progress. I was on the fence of waiting for the r56's back in 06, and decided against based on two simple things: reliability was questionable back then with the unknown, and the pictures of the new car, inside and out.

Still would love the extra power and fuel economy though, big sells for the r56 powerplant.

 

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, right? (PS: I am not totally alone in this line of thinking)

 

THAT just happened! Sorry, love that movie. So, if we were picking a team to design a car, who would pick the new guy as the leader? Who would pick Stephenson? Looks like new safety regulations and a new design leader are strikes one and two on the R56. Strike 3 is the product. Relax.

And I disagree to whoever said that this thread is like all the others. I think this one is more informative with supported opinions; it also seems like a more respectful conversation.

Have any of you read Malcolm Gladwell's Blink? It accurately describes my first encounter with an R56 in person. It hit me the wrong way, and my gut told me to look away. At the time I couldn't intellectually tell myself why it was wrong to me, it just was. Same thing happened when I started driving it. First impressions, in a blink, can be trusted a lot of the time.

Since then I've seen a lot more and driven one for a week and can list everything I don't like and do like about it, but that's all in other threads, so I won't bother here. The point is that this discussion isn't stupid or meaningless, and to think it's unfair that someone feels a design is "ruined" is short-sighted. What's unfair about it? The fact that he felt it? The fact that you might not agree? The fact that you don't want to hear it? The fact that not everyone is going to like what you do? Let's get real - the R56 is a flawed car (and so is the R53), and to discuss it here is why we're here.

mb

 

Exactly!

 

Thats what i thought.

I have read Gladwells book. Whats funny is that in a blink i decided i didnt like the book. Reading it confirmed my suspicions.

I agree. Great thread. Articulate (for the most part) and passionate.

 

I wonder if in 20-30 years from now they will go back to a new "retro design"? Like the mustang, charger, and camaro??

That's why I originally said, I think there will be a love affair with the "original" design of the Mini, just because there is always an evolution of any model of car. Every car goes through changes as it progresses in the future. But sorta like the original vette or mustang, people have that attachment to that first design. Not saying that the progressive versions are not any better or worse.

 

Hopefully not like the "new" Charger.

 

hopefully not back to paisley's, madras, wingtips, and bell bottom's...