Whats a MINI 2 other than a UK based website?

You have the classic cars which is a Mini and then the new ones which is a MINI. BMW paid big bucks to have the rights to the all capital letter version to signify a difference

 

here a non-drawn pics of said car.

This should really upset some people here

Look at the astounding likeness to the classic....much more resemblance than our car will ever have










buahahahah this is awesome. I love this guy

 

those things are all over the place in europe. Those and the smart cars

 

Huh? 3,766? WOW!

 

I dont think it will be 3,766 until now

Been here since the forum was created:impatient

 

Gotcha. I'm just sayin' that the guy may have meant the original "mini".

 

Well, the London taxis WERE made by Austin....

 

At least it's not an SUV...

 

First off, I have already proven it to you. You're just too stubborn to realise it. I believe you are the one I have had trouble with before in another topic. So let me just tell you why you're wrong.

You keep bringing up the fact that BMW copied Rover with the new MINI? You keep saying "MINI", but BMW owns the rights to Mini AND MINI. Don't believe me !! Ask Dean Theobald what happened to his business in jolly old England when BMW aquired the Mini name AND likeness. Since they own the name and LIKENESS, how are they copying?

Just because BMW made their brand name "MINI", doesn't mean that they couldn't have just called it a BMW Mini. They didn't badge them as a BMW brand because that would cutback the amount of BMW cars they could export. It also means that BMW could have made the new MINI just like the old one. BMW didn't copy Rover's classic Mini. If BMW hadn't made this new MINI, Rover was in the process.

 

Been lurking on this site for some time now. I've read a lot of posts... and i mean a lot. I've read so much that I feel like I know some of the different personalities of the members of this board.

But back to the subject. I actually agree with Rally. That car actually looks more like the original Mini than our cars do. I don't know anything about its performance, but I think that car looks pretty cool. To say that car is fugly imo would mean that one doesn't like the looks of the original Mini. If BMW wanted to retain the looks of the original Mini, I think they would have designed the MINI to look like that car.

I understand that cars need to evolve over time. If the 2007 MINI looked more like that car, I think I would have traded in my 2006 MCS. I love the looks of the classics. But hey, this is just one man's opinion. Don't mean to start a war, but from the pics, I just don't like the looks of the 2007 MCS. That's my opinion until I see it in person. To me, a MINI should retain some of the characteristics of the classic, like being miniature in size compared to other cars. With every inch of it growing, I feel it is going further away from the essence of the car.

 

I'm not stubborn, you just have very weak arguments. And, i have never talked to you about the MINI being a copy...sorry. I agree that they may own the name Mini too....but that still doesnt change my argument. No matter what letters are on the car....its a copy.

So your argument is that because they own the name and likeness, its not a copy? How do you figure? What is it then? What is your definition of a copy?

Following your definition of 'copy' why is the Diahatsu a copy while the MINI isnt...?

Definition of copy from dictionary.com
definition of reproduction (as used above in the definition of copy)
By those definitions it certainly seems like BMW has re-produced the Original classic Mini cooper and come up with the MINI (or BMW Mini). the MINI is the up to date reproduction of the classic Mini......aka a copy of the original.

I would love to hear why you feel that a MINI isnt a "copy" . Of course a car needs to evolve over time......but that isnt what happened, they made a reproduction. Compare the '99 minis to the 2002 MINI's. They dont share the same dimensions, chassis, suspension, engine, etc. That's not an evolution....that is a reproduction of a former car.

 

They "own" the likeness. The likeness transferred hands. It was never destroyed and then brought back. It was sold to a company that could revive a dying classic. Rover had already started the new design. BMW just finished it. Since the likeness was transfereed to BMW, it is THEIR car, so therefore they didn't copy Rover.

When Honda "TOTALLY" redesigned the Civic in 2001 bringing out the 7th gen., people were upset. Honda fans felt they ruined a perfectly good car. When BMW redesigned the Mini, people were upset.......see the trend here. Just because a car gets completely turned around, DOES NOT mean it's a different car. The spirit still lives on, albeit in a different chassis..

 

The spirit still lives on in a copy of the original. You still have yet to explain why its not a copy. Simply owning the name and likeness isnt enough to disqualify it as a copy. Explore the definition of copy....reproduction...to make again or ANEW, which means to make again in a new form or manner, much like a car with a full new chassis and character.

Just because a car gets completely turned round does not mean its a different car....of course you're right. But it does qualify it as a re-production of an old car rather than the production of said car. Hence it would fit into the definition of copy.

Both of the cars in discussion are copies...and thats totally fine by me. The rover was an amazing car.

PS...the honda analogy doesnt work so well...comparison between 6th generation and 7th.

The generations share...same wheelbase, same height, very close engine size (its the same base engine, but it was made .1 liter bigger), the rear suspension was maintained, the chassis is very close, and finally, they look nearly identical (see below), so you want to compare those similarities to our car which doesnt share the chassis, the engine, the suspension, the wheelbase, the height, or even the transmission setup....all while kinda looking like the original car but only due to a few stylized throwback details?? Our car rocks, but unlike the hondas you speak of....its not a continuation of a car. Its the continuation of a name and spirit within a NEW REPRODUCTION.

Honda had its 6th generation....they decided it needed macpherson struts so they changed the front suspension. They wanted a little power so they increased the engine size to 1.7 and they wanted a more sporty feel so they changed a little bit of the interior. So they made a few little changes to a previous model to fit with 2001's new standards for what made the new car. Having only stopped production of the classics in 1999...bmw decided that their 2002 vehicles needed to be feet bigger and taller, their wheels needed to be 5-10 inches bigger, the suspension needed to be completely redesigned, a whole new engine and tranny setup needed to be used....and the exterior needed to be completely changed to a far less boxy, more sloped and sporty exterior. So we have the 7th gen honda which was a few little changes to make it fit with the times better, and then you have the MINI which is BMW's interpretation of what the MINI should be in the form of a reproduction

from wikipedia:
6th gen honda civic


7th gen honda civic

 

A friend of mine in highschool had a Honda Z600 coupe. That car was tiny!
I found a picture of it on the web:

His was blue,too.

Here's some info off of the internet:
[FONT=Verdana]The sporty Z600 coupe was introduced in the US in 1971 with a total production of 40,586 sedans and coupes were sold here. Approximately less than 2-1/2% remain today of that number of which most were sedans. [/FONT][FONT=Verdana][/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana][/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana]The 2door Z600 hatchback originally had a 345cc engine in the Japanese market, a more robust 599cc engine was squeezed in for the European markets. It came in basic colors of primarily orange, yellow, olive green and blue. The power plant was a Air-cooled, two cylinder SOHC aluminum engine, this gas miser came through during the oil crisis of the 70’s giving the owners a excellent fuel efficient car, it was rated to get approximately 40mpg while it only held 6.9 gallons of gas. [/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana][/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana]The Honda Z600 was built on a 123in x 51in chassis and approximately 51in high with a Curb weight of 1312lbs. Given it’s small size it was found to still give reasonable comfort to the driver and front passenger. The back seat would be described as storage only because of the little wiggle room in the back. This car had some interesting advances like retractable seat belts and a in dash seat belt warning system, front wheel drive and power assist brakes.[/FONT]

Here's another one. (check out the graffiti)

 

Does have a real cute nose. Anyone spot a bumper of any sort?

regards,
Red