I'd tend to agree with that statement. I know that any vehicle I've owned runs better when it's run regularly and allowed to "stretch its legs," so to speak.

I wouldn't go so far as accuse MINI/BMW of being dishonest either; but I still assert they'd have fewer unhappy/frustrated owners out there if they would just take the time to explain things rather than looking for an easy out ("bad gas"). The explanation to an owner about direct injection engines and the ways to avoid carbon build-up in them (regular "spirited" and highway driving; perhaps some of this Seafoam product every once in a while; etc.) would only have to take place once, and the conversation probably wouldn't last any longer than the time it takes to argue with the same owner about gasoline quality...

I full agree there. 22,000 miles is waaay too long between oil changes, even with synthetic oil. And you may be correct: this could be a direct, contributing factor to the carbon build-up issue as well.

 

I live in a rural area and all most all of my miles are on the open highway and I drive the higher rpm's especially passing the slower vehicles.

Not sure driving city vs. highway makes a difference since last week was my third visit to the dealership involving carbon buildup. I also use name brand 93 octane gasoline.

I do very little city driving.

I will not argue "honesty vs. moral requirement" that Schatzy talks about. Maybe he is the "morality philosopher" on this website, but ask someone who has had this problem if they think that Mini was being forthright with the "gas story" or in not telling any owners that they should use Seafoam. That information never comes from a Mini dealership, just from websites like this one.

 

Related to what some called design faults. Evidently those in the know about engine design don't think so...

 

Flatlander states ....
"Related to what some called design faults. Evidently those in the know about engine design don't think so..."

I don't think that the complaints from some of us relate to the "design faults" as much as it does with the way that Mini has ignored the situation in not explaining the situation either before we have carbon buildup problems and even after the buildup has caused problems with our vehicles.

Either way, "blaming gas" is not an acceptable explanation of the problem. We now have Schatzy complaining about Mini not recommending a shorter interval between oil changes as having a detrimental effect on the buildup problem, so there is definitely enough "grey area" for Mini to have taken more responsibility than they have so far concerning this documented problem.

 

Like Buckbs said, we're very specifically talking about the problems that DO occur with these DI engines in so many cases, no matter what brand of car we're talking about. Yes, they're fantastic engines but they DO have this issue and some of us feel that it's MINI's duty to inform us as buyers about this.

 

OK, you've been informed..............now what?

 

Incredibly simple: now we know whether or not we want to buy the car and deal with this maintenance either ourselves or under MINI maintenance, and now we also know that MINI won't give us any false "bad gas" excuse and will take some responsibility for this side effect of the DI engine. No surprises -- we know what we're getting into and can make an informed decision. Some of us would still buy (me included) and some wouldn't.

(And, in a show of good faith, MINI should ideally offer to do this regular maintenance on the engine as part of the included service plan, should the owner not be one of the many non-mechanical types.)

 

Bravo, Headlands, bravo!

That says what many of us have been trying to say, regardless of some people continuing to defend Mini.

Knowing what I know now, I would probably have not bought the car considering the trips that I have made back to the dealership.