MINI Clubman, Big on Design

Subscribe
Sep 8, 2007 | 09:05 AM
  #1  
Interesting Business Week report and slideshow on the new MINI Clubman.
Mini Clubman, Big on Design
Reply 0
Sep 8, 2007 | 09:22 AM
  #2  
The encouraging thing is that most reviewers seem impressed w/ the real-world benefits of the added space offered in the Clubman, including more back-seat comfort. Add to this that most find none/little of the famous MINI driving characteristics altered. Design aside...if the car can do all that then it will attract buyers. I also happen to think the design approach is well-reasoned and purposeful, so I have no arguments w/ it at all.
Reply 0
Sep 11, 2007 | 04:43 AM
  #3  
Quote:
<snip>And the Mini's big brother is no slouch on the road. The Mini Cooper S Clubman accelerates from zero to 60 mph in 7.6 seconds, while its direct-injection 175-horsepower engine sips an average 44.8 mpg.<snip>
Ok, is that a typo? 44.8MPG from the S engine in a Mini which is bigger and heavier? If not, then.....WOAH!
Reply 0
Sep 11, 2007 | 05:06 AM
  #4  
Quote:
Ok, is that a typo? 44.8MPG from the S engine in a Mini which is bigger and heavier? If not, then.....WOAH!
Probably European driving cycle mileage, not US.
Reply 0
Sep 11, 2007 | 05:16 AM
  #5  
Ahhh,..I assumed (yes, I know) those were U.S. specs.
Reply 0
Sep 11, 2007 | 09:00 AM
  #6  
not that much heavier
I read somewhere (Edmunds, maybe?) that it's only 143 pounds heavier than the MINI. So I'm hopeful that MPG won't suffer that much.

Wish they'd nix that contrasting C pillar, though....
Reply 0
Sep 11, 2007 | 04:32 PM
  #7  
Quote: Wish they'd nix that contrasting C pillar, though....
I agree .
Reply 0
Sep 11, 2007 | 07:25 PM
  #8  
This seems like a win win for BMW/Mini. A car that is unique, totally fun, upscale and functional.
Reply 0
Oct 11, 2007 | 01:58 PM
  #9  
I know I am a little late here, but ...

My biggest fear with the Clubman was that it would lose performance wrt the Coupe/Convertible due to the added weight. It was so encouraging to see that not only is performance loss negligible (wrt speed), but actually improves in some areas (handling, stability, etc.)
Reply 0
Nov 2, 2007 | 12:04 PM
  #10  
Quote: I read somewhere (Edmunds, maybe?) that it's only 143 pounds heavier than the MINI.
As the drag coefficient is lower than the R56 S it very well could be...

That would be A Good Thing if true!
Reply 0
Nov 3, 2007 | 06:28 AM
  #11  
Quote: Probably European driving cycle mileage, not US.
And probably Imperial gallons, which are 20% larger than US gallons. That would give 37.3 US mpg.
Reply 0
Subscribe