When does your Clubman arrive??

 

If Frank Stephenson had stayed at MINI design, the R56 would have been a much better looking car. There are aspects of the R56 design that would have never seen the light of day under Stephenson's eye.

 

Soon my friend! Its loaded on the truck. Any day now. Will post pics plus a full review...

 

Excellent!!! One of our local guys (also on NAM) is expecting one, too (it's the 5th MINI for him). We had some serious fun test-driving those Clubmans and poking all around them. I was duly impressed!!

Also...in reference to saving the 2002-2006 MC (thread title...did he mean MCS??)...I am, in fact, a big fan of the Cooper. Always have been...I'm on my second. The tweaks on the R56 Cooper make it a better MINI in almost every possible way from the engine, to the gearbox, to the cleaner styling w/ wonderful detail. I know some may agrue about the MCS, but w/ the Cooper it's pretty darn clear. And yet.....I still have a soft spot for that first gen car a mile wide and if I had one (well, I do, but the daughter has it....constantly) I'd treat it like gold. Yes, the bumper strips were faux and it has that rather dated grill ...but that car still is all MINI. I am enjoying the R56 improvements, though, soft spot and all.

 

has anyone mentioned the stereo of the early 02s, there is no comparison for later models with the bigger ****.

 

Bingo! Stephenson is both a design genius and a bull dog when it comes to getting what he wants. One can only imagine what the R56 could have been... He would have promptly kicked the bean counters out of the design studio, and delivered another masterpiece... instead of the caricature that is the R56

 

Or the side markers, bonnet gap over the front wheels, wiper tray (!!), spacing of the headlights ...and the rear end troubles me more than the front.

But, like gokartride so rightly says, to each their own. I admire gokartride for the ability to see beauty in both designs. I am getting there with the Cooper, but can't with the MCS.

For me the R53 is proportionately correct all around with just the right curves and details, whereas the R56 seems aesthetically awkward. I really wish the R56 were more radically different than the R53. If it was totally different, as opposed to similar, yet different, I think the evolution would have looked ...well, more evolutionary.

ClubmanS: I do work ...about 14 hours a day in front of the computer ...Saturdays too. I don't smoke or drink coffee, so NAM serves as my coffee/cig breaks ...which I seem to take a lot of.

Dean.

 

This was a big issue for me with the Gen 2 cars. I have been in audio, professionally, for 30 years and even longer as a hobbyist. The sound systems in the Gen 2 cars, particularly the standard system, set car stereo back 20 years. The upgrade system is barely as good as the standard system in most $20K cars. The system in my '84 Honda Civic S was better ...and it wasn't very good. But, at least I was able to change it, whereas changing the Gen 2 system is a nightmare.

My h/k system sounds pretty darn good ...far from perfect, but respectable enough that I have no inclination to mod/change.

Dean.

 

Actually, what I think is great is that the R56 designers borrowed a good bit from the classic Mini well as the first gen car. And...they made an update that was truly evolutionary with respect to the first gen car...brilliant. Additionally, they were not overly hampered by the first gen car and dialed in R56 to be good/properly proportioned in it's own right....if certain things required change, they did it so the car would stand on it's own. And they did this in a way that still reads as virtually the same car!!! Amazing!! Further...they went so far as to extract actual function out of the whole thing as the aerodynamic improvements of R56 took a huge leap forward which directly influences the overall efficiency/economy of the car. Even the interior cabin (even though it's easy to criticize from afar) is surprising in it's level of real functionality and actual decrease of faux elements!!

I'm not saying one is better than another, but that each can stand on it's own legs w/ no apologies...and no one could have done a better job.

In any case, Frank's work on the (also iconic) Fiat 500 clearly shows that design elements on R56 was not outside his palette for use. I think, had he directed the R56 re-design, that you'd see a good bit of what is there now, especially as we know he clearly believed in design evolution.

Don't worry...your MINI is in very good and capable hands. MINI designers have done a far better job of being protective of MINI than many of us ever could have been. They all deserve kudos.

 

I agree with Reelsmith... the R56 is fugly... period. I'm sure that if Stephenson had been given the opportunity to design the R56, it would have had a completely different outcome than the "bobo the clown" R56 BMW delivered to us. Hopefully BMW can lure Frank back to design the next generation MINI!

 

So now we ARE driving clown cars??????

This is ridiculous

Well I guess all MINI owners are because they aren't dramatically different on the outside...a few changes and improved refinements for the R56, but overall the same car

So EVERYONE enjoy your clown car

because someone here ^^^ thinks we're all clowns

 

Isn't this what classic owners said? hahahaha I think we have to have change and growth within the auto industry. Luckily, you can have your 1st gen MINI and someone else can have 2nd gen or a classic.

 

A hint to those that are having a hard time with what some folks are saying in this, or any other thread, put them on your ignore list.

The message on this thread is clear, depending on how you interpret the sales numbers, the second gen. cars are either tanking, staying the course, or getting better. Another thing is clear, some folks like the way the new MINIs look and function, some don't.

Is saving the 02-06 MINI important to you? Most here seem to agree it is, I'm in that camp, and have planned on keeping mine for a long time, long before there was even a hint of what the 2nd gens. were going to look like, be engineered, or powered.

Both generations have their strong points, and weak ones. I do know that the engine was not at fault in the engine bay fires, but that is not the issue, some of the cars self-destructed, period.

Now we hear about the new ones having cold start/piston slap/oil pressure/some form of engine problem. Parts are being changed, even engines in some cases. Theories abound as to what the root problem is, I'm sure in time it will be resolved.

Will the 02-06 MINI become a true CLASSIC, maybe, only time will tell, and NO ONE can predict this.

Now I'm going to the local dealer for a small event with our club to check out Clubmans, which we will be getting in the future. The 05 Cabrio will be the trade-in, sold car when that happens.

Mark

 

Actually, the first theory is the right one -- the safety regulations which forced the raised bonnet were not enacted when 1st gen was designed. These are new pedestrian laws which recently came into effect.
I don't think the laws explain all design features (ex. the body mounted headlights were done for production/cost cuts -- resulting, in my opinion, in a weird off-center look and ugly gaps), and its hard to tell how much of the rising belt line and too high rear end is a result of carrying the raised front design throughout -- but there's no denying that at least some of the design was driven with compliance with new laws.

 

Well, slaggy, you've always been of that opinion and have effectively painted yourself into a corner on the issue...well done!! It is quite definitely not ugly...I drive by a MINI dealership every day (I live 2 blocks away). Guess what...yup...it's a bunch of MINIs sitting out there, pure and simple. How many of the press reviews started with, "Well, it may not look any different but, in fact, it is" or "The first thing you notice is...well, that it's the same."? Bunches. You can rant about "ugly" all you want but that agrument holds no water any more...sorry. That kind of broad, purely subjective and (dare I say it) uneducated (from a design perspective)statement is something the classic folks might have levied at the New MINI, but it simply does not apply here in an obviously evolutionary design.

As for the headlights....they are simply more stable mounted on the chassis and less prone to vibration. That was the reason...we've known that for a long time. It is a functional improvement. Eager2own is right about the belt-line, too...it was raised to fit in with the front end redesign...we've known about that since the beginning, too. That the redesign also has better aerodynamics is just an added value to also meeting new pedestrian safety standards. Both of these changes are "well-motivated" and the design course is pretty clear. Frank, as a designer, would no doubt agree.

I offer these defenses only because instead of saving the 2002-2006 Cooper we are bashing R56 again which is a very childish approach to the whole question at hand.

Speaking of which, I do hope you who are into saving the first gen car are ready to put your money (and garage space) where your mouth is...I suspect most of you are. As prices become more reasonable for the first gen car, I fear the same testosterone-poisoned demographic will get ahold of them and promptly wrap them around trees or flog them to death trying to prove how manly they are. I do hope you who are more experienced will be the champions of the car and provide the expertise to make sure the first gen cars stay on the road for a long time.

 

Oh I hate to sound cliché ...but beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

How can anything be considered patently good looking or definitively ugly? No such thing. Beautiful to some, ugly to others. It really is just as simple as that ...whether it be art, fashion, architecture or a MINI.

Beauty and lack thereof are a matter of opinion.

Dean.

 

Well, yes and no. The R56 MINI is an evolution of the first gen car. How can something we love, via an evolution, turn into something the polar opposite, especially when the bulk of the motoring pressed tagged it as "virtually unchanged" visually. That's my point. If someone doesn't prefer it, and or think it is ugly themselves, fine...but to say it is ugly...no, I cry foul on that!!! And this doesn't even count all us owners who think it's really great!!

Secondly, for anyone who has studied design, there are definite protocols by which good/sound design is determined. It is an industry...not based on whim and speculation, not at all. These protocols are part of first year studies...maybe even first class studies!!! R56 development followed all these protocols and more, and so I hold the design to be very well motivated and executed. In fact, the work of R56 designers is far, far better than they have been given credit for. I drive one every day...trust me on this. Some of you (not all, but you know who you are ) took a negative view on this from the get-go and you're just going to have to budge or remain in the corner...not that you have to like it personally, but to give it it's just due.

In summation, design is not based on a whim or a fleeting emotion, it is hard core well-motivated problem-solving and the R56 design process stands up to this scrutiny easily. Certainly enough to not prounounce it "ugly"...that much is for sure. I find it's more aggressive stance very nice.

I can go to the mat with you all on styling...but if you start talking about piston slap again then okay...you're not in my territory any more.

 

Have you ever seen a movie that the critics loved, but you thought it stunk? Ever dined in a restaurant 5-star restaurant and not like it?

The motoring press is nothing more than a group of opinions, opinions that I summarily dismiss when making a buying decision. Calling something "virtually unchanged" is an opinion, not a fact.

As for something we love evolving into something we don't like; it's happened many times before in all sorts of industries. I like mechanical wristwatches and spend a lot of time on forums debating the evolution of certain models from beauty to hideousness ...and vice versa.

You said: It is quite definitely not ugly ...that's no different than saying it is ugly. It was stated as fact, but it is not.

I've tried to be very careful to say "I think ...." as opposed to "It is ....". Semantics are very important.

And sometimes well-motivated problem-solving runs amuck and creates more issues than it resolves. Just because designers tried hard to do their best in no way guarantees success. Everyone fails on occasion.

For the record ...and I may sound like a broken one at this point ...I don't think the R56 is ugly ...its looks just don't appeal to me.

Dean.

 

I find the R56 fugly.... I find the bulbous shape of the R56 very clownish... the addition of pie sized speedo, fish eye head lights, and 4wd stance add to this perception. The car is completely disproportional to my eyes. I do find that the Clubman is a much more appealing shape... and works visually much better than the R56. I wish the Clubman addressed the fish eyes...


Fugly --> Ugliness is possessed by physical things that are unappealing to the senses, especially visually.

Some argue that ugliness is a matter of subjective aesthetics, claiming that one person may perceive to be beautiful something that another may find ugly.

 

I feel the same way about the 911, but if the person who owns one likes it that's ok with me.

 

gokartride -- did you experience headlight vibration problems with your first MC? I only ask 'cause I have never thought that was an issue with my R53 -- and only began to hear about this when MINI seemed to use it as a justification for the headlight redesign (to counter the first reports which claimed it was for cost reduction). I'm just wondering if this really was a problem, before the R56 "fixed" the issue or
(cynic warning) if it just sounded better to the PR folk than saying we changed a characteristic of the R53 for cost-reduction.

 

Well gang, after driving a Clubman today, one will be in our future I have been around many 2nd gen. MINIs, so all the design changes I have long gotten over, and none really turned me off to start with.

The Clubman S we took out today had LSD, and it did address my concerns with torque steer. Pulling onto an interstate from a curvy ramp, and going WOT it did not pull the car in either direction, and I did not notice, not saying it's not there, any drop off as I took the car to bounce. The ride is very different, first it's quiet, way more than my 03. I did not get to really drive it on any real twisties, but the highway was clear, so I did get to do some fast lane changes and maneuver the car around. It felt very connected to the road, but I will admit, I did not FEEL it in my hands as much as a 1st gen. But this is not a land yacht, still very much a drivers car, dare I say enthusiast.

So after all that, and free food at the dealer I got back in my 03 MC, and it still felt great, goes like snot, yeah I know it's not an S, but in the twisties most S drivers are hard pressed to keep up, and it felt like home, been in the left seat for 95k miles, gone through all kinds of roads and weather together, thing probably saved my life, long story, not going to tell it now, but I and my wife have embraced the 2nd gen cars, and in particular the Clubman.

So if someone wants to tell me it is ugly, is not trouble free, and I'm not either a Mini/MINI or a driving enthusiast, well so be it, because it does not play into my mindset, which is, I could give a rats a$$ what anyone thinks about my choice of car.

Now if you have a problem with personal attacks, then report them, period. Because I, and the rest of the Moderators can't read ever post, sorry if it seems like we do, but we don't.

Mark

 

+1

 

The change to the lights... and flattening of the hood and lost of the cowl... cost cutting measures. The hood of the R50/53 is expensive to produce. Other obvious R56 cost cuts: loss of the rear glass curvature and loss of temperature gauge for starters...

A major design goal of the R56 was to reduce manufacturing costs... The original series was an expensive automobile to produce... as Frank held the line with the bean counters.

The Clubman design actually works fairly well... It would be comforting to see if MINI is going to fix the piston slapping/cold noise issues before diving in...

 

I agree, but it will not deter us from starting the process of buying one. My second Midlands was supposed to be dead by now, and it feels better than the Gertag in the 05.

So anyone want to buy a 05 MC Cabrio, BRG, 35k miles, looks like new

Mark