I notice, too, that the JCW strut tower brace for the R56 has a heavy looking beam that spans the opening, presumably to give more bracing to the area right above the strut.

 

I hope this is the case. I'd like to see the new Mini with some camber adjustment, even if its only 1 degree.

 

R56MCS, would you be good enough to post a copy here of the email you received from MINI HQ in Oxford so that all MINI owners would be able to refer to it when pursing strut tower failures with BMW MINI USA? It would be very helpful to have something in writing that acknowldeges that this was an issue of which MBW was aware.

Thanks!

 

The fact that it's a weak link is plain to see (at least for anyone that it happens to) but a failure is a bit of an over statement.

Matt

 

When a "weak link" (your words) fails, why isn't that a "failure"? So where is the overstatement?

 

I think you have missed the point. Knowing something and being able to prove it are two entirely different things. Knowing that there is a "weak link" because it "is plain to see" is not any proof of that fact when making a warranty claim to BMW MINI. The post said that Oxford MINI had admitted in an email that there were problems or issues associated with the strut towers. Having a copy of that written admission would be proof when making a claim for warranty work to BMW MINI US. That was why I asked him to put a copy of the email on this forum.

 

and there are lots of cars that start to bend. The reason I say that it's a weak link and not a failure (at least the strut tower mushrooming) is that 1) it won't kill you and 2) that some very high milage cars don't have it at all. FWIW, I have a punished 02 with only very, very slight mushrooming.

We have unibody cars. As they get beat and driven they distort. Fact of life with the design...

I'm very familiar with older Mustangs. The sock tower there was a "problem spot" that fatigued, bent, distorted or cracked. Those that beat their cars or drove the big V8s beefed them up. It's a place to look if you're buying a Mustang. But it's not a failure. It's patina!

Matt

 

How can you show that it wasn't caused by the mother of all potholes? What you will find is that some dealerships are better than others. But if someone wants to stick with the story that it's from bad roads (and they're pretty much bad everywhere) then you're screwed, even if they admit that they improved the design in the future.

But it's worth a shot. But what do you want them to do about it? Take out the 2x4 and hammer it down? That's what they'd do, and that's what pretty much every tuner shop does as well......

What they won't do is weld in anything different than what has caused all this in the first place. They won't weld at all......

If this is really of concern, get some camber plates (stronger below) and a strut bar or tower reinforcing plates. Drive and don't sweat it.

Matt

 

Are you for real? It's not a defect because it won't kill you? Where did you ever get that definition? So if your new car has a stress fracture in the windshield, it's not a defect unless you die? You should work for BMW, they would love your definition of "defect."

 

Sorry to say I think you have missed the point again. When Oxford MINI acknowledged in writing (email) that mushrooming strut towers was an issue that needed to be corrected they have admitted to a latent defect. (Of course if you hit the "mother of all potholes you can deform even a non-defective strut tower,) but BMW MINI USA won't admit to any issues with deformed strut towers so a written admission from Oxford MINI gets you over the hurdle that the strut towers are a latent defect than can come to light without hitting the mother of all potholes. With the written admission from Oxford MINI in hand you are half way home in presenting a warranty claim. Without it you have a long road in front of you because BMW MINI USA takes the position that all mushrooming is caused by road hazards and that there is no weak link in their strut towers. That's the point. With the written admission of a latent defect in hand they will not be able deny every warranty claim on the basis that it was caused from bad roads. So that is why I asked for a copy of the email.

 

Legalr - Dr O - taking an outside view at both point, they're both valid, but the determining factor is what was EXACTALLY said by MINI Oxford. We're only speculating on a paraphrase right now.

IF they recognize this as a structural defect, then legalr seems to be hitting the nail on the head -

IF they view it merely as a design flaw, wich it may well be then Dr O seems to be correct.

If you look at MINI2 you'll see very few instances of this occuring in the rest of the world, why? did they build different cars for the US market? are the roads that much worse here? or are the drivers better at avoiding road obsticles in the rest of the world.

In 2 years of driving in New England I've had very slight mushrooming of one tower. I see the flaw in the design of the upper strut mount being the issue - as such, I have a set of Camber plates waiting to go on this spring - do I belive this is a FAILURE - No, just a quirk, and attribute it more to the run-flats than anything else.

 

We have to see the email that Oxford MINI wrote. Until we have it and can examine the language used we are merely speculating. That is why I asked for it three times.

A product is deemed to be defective if it is not reasonably fit, suitable, or safe for the ordinary or foreseeable purpose for which it is sold. MINIs are sold to operate on the public streets and highways. All highways have some imperfections in them so it is unreasonable for BMW MINI to say that MINIs are intended only for use on highways having no imperfectrions. The amount and nature of tolerable highway imperfections is one of degree and presents an issue of fact.

In the world of warranty claims there is no such thing as a "quirk." A product is either defective or it is not. If as some posters have claimed they merely drove on public hightways and did not hit any potholes or other major imperfections and they still had deformed strut towers, it would seem their car was defective when sold--not reasonably fit for the ordinary or foreseeable purpose for which it was sold.

We need to see the Oxford MINI email.

 

With the windshield, yes Mini even admited that they had too much stress in them, but they still instigated the stupid "pen test" to see if it was from an "Impact"

In the case of the weak point of the body, what would you say to the guy who said yours was from a pot hole? The piece of paper shows that it could have been from just driving, but it doesn't say squat about what happened to your car.

What it will come down to is that if you have a receptive SA or dealership, things will work out well for you. If you have someone who for whatever reason thinks abuse caused your particular failure, you'll have a heck of a time getting anyone to listen to your complaint. After all, even you won't be able to prove anything about your particular car....

Here's another way to think of things. What degree of change from new is tolerable during a warranty period? Lots ages on a car over that time, yet little is replaced. The standard wear items are, but lots of properties of stuff on the car is different as it gets older than when new. Should all of these parts be replaced? That would be every part of rubber in the entire car, and every wear surface. So in that case it's not perfection that is the standard, it's that it will still do what it was designed to do. A bit of a change in the shape of the shock tower won't prevent the car from doing what it's supposed to do....... And if you think your car is perfect to begin with, side to side camber differences can be as much as 0.2 degrees, and that's considered fine. So the upper point moves a bit. It will take a long time to move enough to get the allignement really out of wack to where it can't be dialed in. And for those of you that have asked, Mini doesn't include alignements in the free service.... So when I think about the differences that minor mushrooming does to the car, and I see that for almost everyone, it's less than the manufacturing tolerance, then it's not that big a deal....


I guess the other reason I don't really sweat it is that I beat my cars, and expect to have to fix them. Doesn't relly matter if it's a socket wrench or a hammer, that's what's up when you drive a car hard.

And no, I don't think the standard of a defect is weather or not it will kill you, but then, I don't really sweat stuff that isn't dangerous....

Personally, I wish it were designed better. I think Mini screwed up on that one. But that said, I don't really think they should weld in a stiffener to every car made as well. I'd think it would be nice if they'd align cars that have mushrooming. I can just imagine what the 2x4 with the BMW part number for the factory tool would cost!

What I'm trying to point out is that it will be a crap shoot to have it covered or not. It will be worse in the 56, if they really say they've done something to improve it, obviously our abuse caused it!

Matt

 

There are two opinions both of which are right.

Here's #3: The design of the upper strut support is the real problem. This is the piece we all replace to address this issue, some with fixed plates, some adjustable. It seems that all Minis do not have the tower problem, at least not as extreeme as others ( I have an 03 - no visible deflection yet, differing material for the support??? ). The OE design, tower, may be addiquate for the load. This is borne out with the use of these aftermarket plates. No welding involved. If BMW Mini were to address this issue it would be an easy fix IMO.
The question is will Mini ever see a potential failure? So far, NO. If such a failure were to happen, would the outcome be monumental? Could be. I'v seen a ball joint failure on the interstate that took the left front corner off the car. A tower failure could have a similar result. Since there has been no such failure, just deflection, the strong possibility of no failure, as Dr O says it will be normal wear & tare. Abuse is just another word for spirited driving - that's what they built the car for. Yes???
As for this car - thie issue has been addressed my way.
With the new 07 model all I want to see is the strut support plate. If it's much better.......

Is there a part # for the 2x4 & how much is it? Does it have BMW written on it? It makes a difference.

 

Checked mine today after 1800 miles, no signs of mushrooming.

 

Have you whacked any big pot holes or anything?

Matt

 

I've hit a few including a newly resurfaced ramp yesterday at over 80mph, not a huge bump but a hell of a noise and a bounce (hence the checks). I live out in the country so the road surfaces are not exactly billiard table smooth. I guess it would be fair to say it's had a fairly hard time of it so far.

 

To answer your question, it will take a while to see if they are indeed prone to mushrooming.

However after reading Paul Mullet's thread about the horrendous leak his R56 had and that this may be fairly prevalent, a more urgent question is will the car actually be prone to growing real mushrooms from the dampened carpets?

 

 

What is Mushrooming?

 

This is... the top section of the strut tower should be flat, not bent upward.
The bolts should be pefectly level and are clearly not in these photos.
These pics are from an 04 MCS... exbumblebee03 mini.



and another pic from a different mini... not an 07 mind you

 

bump, anyone?

 

How will adding a brace effect/change the ride? From the sounds of it, I would probably be safe/better off installing a brace, but I'm just curious.

Also, I'm a newbie, so I have to ask: what's a camber adjustment??

 

owning a MINI has brought a whole list of new meanings to words I thought I knew.... When I was in college, mushrooming was... oh, nevermind. I won't even talk about DP.

 

Camber is how the wheels lean in towards the side of the car.

Caster is how much the pivot of the front wheels lean forwards or backwards.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Camber_angle