thanks joey, sounds nice!

 

Greg, I am sorry to say, but you have taken my post waaaay out of context

Indeed the R56 is in my future. Let's not be like the Classic Mini owners back in 2001 who bemoaned (and still do to this day) the fact that BMW moved the 1959 Issigonis design into the realm of the 21st century.

I think what eberyone at some point or another fails to see is that each generation of the car has brought up very good and enduring qualities of the car for years to come. The R53 appeals to a more hardcore customer base, meanwhile the R56 appeals to the enthusiast MINI base that did not like or care the demeanor of the previous car. The "finesse" of the new R56 doesn't make the previous car some kind of junker destined to a hidden hall of shame. Quite on the contrary, for people that like the "rougher" go kart feeling of the previous model, the R50/53 will be the ticket and for those customers (like you) who prefer the look of the MINI, but the demeanor of a "Baby BMW" the R56 is and will be up your alley.

It is hard to say what Frank Stephenson would have done faced with the EU pedestrian regulations back in the mid 1990's, However, that was not the case. BMW had specific requirements for the look and profile of the bonnet and this is why they turned down the idea of fitting Rover's K-series engine because it would make it challenging to fit in the small engine bay and second it would have raised the profile. BMW opposed the idea from the get go and this is why they turned to Chrysler for an all new engine (TRITEC).

If you think I am making this up, go and read this book:

The New MINI second edition (August 2005)
Graham Robson

 

Part of the beauty of the MINI is that the many of the current styling cues are from the original 60's MINI design. Those styling cues are carried forward in a nostalgic way in both the R-50/53 series as well as the new R56 series of MINIs.

This same thinking applies to Mustangs, Corvettes, the nostalgic look of the PT Cruiser, the FJ Cruiser SUV, etc. This mentality ain't new. So we should be excited about a brand new MINI, appreciate the nostalgia they have seen fit to preserve and embrace the new technology they have implemented.

I bought my Cooper rather than an MCS primarily because of the gas mileage difference. To my delight, the '07 MCS now gets as good gas mileage as my '06 Cooper! That's AWESOME! Once I'm in a suitably good equity position in my 06 MC, I see a new MCS in my future.

 

C4, I'm not reacting to your post specifically. I'm reacting to several people who have held up Frank and his design as some kind of ideal - which is fine - but who go on to fault the R56 for deviating from it, which is ridiculous.

The scenarios you set out about "hard-core" is also rubbish. R53 owners did not buy the R53 because they are "hard-core" - they bought it because its the only mini that was available. Plenty of non-hard-core buyers bought it too. Feedback from those people obviously played the design for the R56. I imagine that if everybody felt the car needed to be rougher around the edges then the R56 would not be more refined. But the truth is that the R53 was more refined than the original mini, and the R56 is more refined than the R53. And the next car will be even more so, as is the pattern with most cars, and the great majority of people see that as improvement.

That's how I see it too. So, all these people who don't, well I hardly see them as "hard-core". Maybe luddites, maybe nostalgic at best. They have their R53s - what are they griping about. brother!

 

Lava.. WELL , I concur with you.

 

You betcha'. A lot of folks bought it simply because it was cute. I deal a lot with architects and interior designers and am surprised how many own MINIs because they are design oriented and are attracted to the design ...yet when talking to them about their MINIs it is very clear that they are the furthest thing from an enthusiast imaginable.

The car has very broad appeal ...and deservedly so.

dean.

 

Frank did an absolutely superb job given the task at hand. Apparently even execution of his design for the R50 bonnet was a bit of a compromise...the lines were supposed to be less flowing, more acute/drawn in. The bonnet pressing, however, was technically impossible to create as designed...so a compromise was made. Hence the curves we all love.

R56s bonnet has some nice curves, too, if one takes time to appreciate it on it's own merits. And if certain technical standards/issues had an impact on it's final shape...well the same was true with the venerable R50.

 

Let's face it. Beauty isin the eye of the beholder. Take the latest BMW generation designs for example. To my eye the butt ugliest they ever created as compared to the last generation which were the best BMW designs ever (except for some of the art neuveau designs from the earlier part of the last century). Professional car critics, however, are raving about the aero-blob, japanese affected, transformer lines of the current models.

To me, the R53 and the R56 both have great styling, but are 2 totally different cars, the R56 starting to approach the other Japanese 2 door hatchbacks, and the R53 remaining a more idiosynchratic retro style with future cult car potential, the Classic Mini Cooper already being a cult car.

 

+1

 

Beauty, like reality, is always in the eye of the beholder.
If anyone wants to believe that they hold the keys to what is and isn't beauty, that's fine with me. That just goes to prove my point about reality.

 

I read somewhere that the Talmud says:

We don't see things the way they are, we see things the way we are.

That fits here .. Right?

 

I don't think you have the quote just right...
I think it's more like this:

"Beauty is in the eye of the BEERHOLDER!"

 

No, it's: "Everything is beauty in the eyes of the BEERHOLDER!"

 

Added more photos of the R56 Cooper automatic and Cooper S 6-speed manual. Completed back to back test drives last night and will have a review later today. For now, some pics to wet your appetite:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/frankinmiami/

also wanted to add that the Cooper handled better than the MCS. The R56 S was very nice overall, but the handling at the limit was a turn off when compared to the R53, even with SS+ suspension and sport button active all the way. Also the extremely light clutch pedal action was unsettling for me. Perhaps this is great for someone new to manual transmission, but for me, I had to re-learn launching the car out of 1st gear because the damn pedal almost gives no feedback. This is one of the most significant differences owners of the R53 will notice on the R56 MCS manual.
Conversely, after my 30 minute drive in the R56 MCS and coming back to my car, I had to re-learn launching out my R53 out of first gear. The clutch pedal in the old car is decidely FIRM but love the fact that it gives you feedback when it “bites”.
The new shifter in the MCS is smooth and direct but I found the throws to be a little on the long side. Reverse is now a piece of cake, but way to easy now to accidentally engage it in the midst of traffic.
More details to come later, but all I can say is this: Current R53 owners (Specially 2005 and 2006) don’t have to lose sleep over the new car. The steering’s calibration and out of the box suspension settings (Not to mention the oh intoxicating supercharger whine and exhaust burble)are still a cut above of the R56. Drving the R56 you can clearly see how BMW decidely over engineered the R53. You may ask how the R53 JCW GP fares against the R56 MCS? No contest! The R53 JCW GP kills the R56 MCS in every measure of performance and handling. The JCW GP will continue to be, for sometime, the fastest best handling Cooper S from factory.

 

Ok - so C4 is the same as FranklinMiami at MotoringFile comments. That explains a lot.

I think you are the first and only person to conclude that the R56 does not handle as well as the R53, as well as many of your other conclusions being "over the top" in the extremity of your position.

Prudent consumers would shave off the low and high results when seeking the mean.

 

C4's R53 biased reviews are all well and good for R53 owners to rationalize their current ride, however the real acid test will be when past R53 owners [like myself] take delivery of an R56, and find it's a better or worse platform to create a superior hot-hatch. If you find me and others dumping the R56 and buying an R53 in a years time, then C4's statements will have been validated. Time will tell, just like with VW's era of GTI's.

--->C4: Is your R53 stock? If not, what mods does it have? I'm looking for your perspective, as I'm sure it's different than mine.

 

Really?

The R56 MCS is a very good handler but at the limit it slides. This opinion was shared by some people that had the opportunity to put the car to the test in Phoenix.

I am not rationalizing my R53 at all. It seems that certain R56 owners simply can''t take a different opinion on the car and that is fine.

Go and test the car for yourself. Take a hairpin turn at 40+MPH with the sport button turned on and then come back and report your impressions. Then take a stock R53 on the same course. There is a difference in the demeanor of both cars.

I drove the thing yesterday and drove it hard. Liked it a lot and if I were in the market for a new MINI, most likely would have order it.

Ryephile: My MCS is 100% stock. I took the car on the same test drive route and could not get it to slide in the same way the R56 began to get a little unsettled. There is an empty hairpin turn under I-395 in Miami, where you can push the car to scary speeds. It did very well, but not as good as a R53. A modded R53 or a JCW GP would have no problem dealing with this part of the route at all.

My thinking Rye is that lowering the car and using a rear sway bar and aftermarket shocks will help eliminate the "sliding"tendency at high speeds.

Also, in normal street driving you'll probably never notice it, but out in the track you will, baby.

 

Rye, I am sure you have already driven the R56 MCS. Can you elaborate a little on what you did with the car and how far you pushed it? Comparing notes is always helpful to clear up mis-conceptions

 

I'm ready to hear any opinion. But I've read your comments here and at motoringfile, and your opinions are at the extreme. As somebody reading the messages I don't find you credible.

C4 - you are prejudice. You love your cars - thats fine. But to call what you are doing an un-bias review is a joke. Your comments from MotoringFile:

R53: perfect proportions
R56: blatant visual discrepancies

review?
rationalization?

 

That's fine Greg. I don't claim to be an automotive expert or a professional race course driver. My opinions are based on my ownership of 3 MINIs over the last 5 years and my test drives of the R56 that took place last night.

Don't read too much into my opinions. I still think the R56 is a fantastic car, but the stock MCS still needs some minor tweaking to get it right. Perhaps the upcoming JCW version will address some of these.

Yes, the R56 is smoother, more relaxed, more upscale, more BMW than ever before. Great traits for sure, but the essence of the MINI or the "hook"of the car is in the handling.

 

Also a switch AWAY from the stock runflats would probably help a lot, too.

Though runflat technology has improved considerably over the last year, they're still not the greatest when pushed hard. They slide... the new ones are just a lot more predictable/controllable when they start to go away.

 

that would mean runflats on his R53, no?

 

Yes. Dunlop SP5000 195/55/R16 on R84 rims.

 

Just thought I would once again point out.......That.....

Even if the R56 is a better dancer she is still the ugly girl at the dance. The R56 just doesn't look right even if its performance is.....and that is the bottom line everyone knows whether they admit it or not

 

Everyone ?

Excuse me?

In order for it to be "everyone" it would have to include, uh, everyone ...that would mean me too.

Please speak for yourself.

Thanks.

dean.