MINI’s 2008 Fuel Saving Technology Not Coming to US Market

DB Jul 17th, 2007 Link

Wow. I’m really starting to feel like we are getting the short end of the stick. First, the decision to not bring the diesel here and now not to get any of the technology that actually IMPROVES the mileage of the R56 without affecting performance?

I’m extremely disappointed.

Reply

Nigel Jul 18th, 2007 Link

They fear mounting warranty claims and problems that may creep up from these emerging technologies.

Actually BMW might be doing the US consumer a favor by not adding these features into US spec cars.

But from the fuel saving point of view, I am also dissapointed. Lawyers and Beancounters are clearly at the helm of BMW these days…

Reply

mike Jul 18th, 2007 Link

While I am dissappointed with this news I understand. When you consider what we pay in the US compared to what they pay in the UK I would expect to do some cost cutting/prevention.

Maybe once they are confident in the technology, it will come our way.

Reply

AN Jul 18th, 2007 Link

Wow. Nigel with a negative opinion. Who’da thunk it?

BMW/MINI/RR seems to be the envy of the car world these days. The Americans are in the toilet, the Japanese are bland and boring – except for Toyota, though they’re stripmining Canada for nickel so they can make Prius batteries.

I guess it’s a bummer that we don’t get every feature here, but I’m happy to drive a product made by a company that seems to be navigating the choppy car waters pretty nicely these days.

Reply

Nigel Jul 18th, 2007 Link

Gas isn’t exactly cheap here. And remember that the bulk of what Europeans pay for their gas is made up of a plethora of taxes.

I just think that MINI still has to contend with the check engine light problems that are plaguing the R56 (And I was informed of this by the lead MINI tech at my dealership, a 5 year MINI veteran and highly respected fella in our community) and not until they get to iron these wrinkles out, MINIUSA has decided to opt out of these features until the technology is proven to be reliable. If this is the case, I think it is a wiser move, not necessarily the best one, but a step in the right direction nevertheless.

Reply

eto Jul 18th, 2007 Link

I wasn’t excited about the auto-stop feature, but previous reports stated that would have an on/off button, so no problem. I am disappointed that the brake regeneration won’t make it.

Overall, you have to be impressed with the MINI as we have it currently. Where else can you get a car that can get 30MPG in the city, has sports car handling, and can reach 60 mph in 6.5 seconds (in S guise)?

It will be interesting to see if MINIUSA includes these features in 2009, since 2008 has been bypassed.

Reply

Chad Jul 18th, 2007 Link

I would think the gear shift indicator would be pretty easy to do. Nothing mechanical involved. If you find out the software needs tweaking, you post a service bulletin.

Reply

ichor Jul 18th, 2007 Link

stupid, with a capital M. ok, if they want to wait with their tail between their legs then i will take their lead and wait also. this is just not on.

Reply

VMMVMMM Jul 18th, 2007 Link

If it is really an issue of ensuring these technologies work before they come here, then I understand. If not, I don’t know what they’re thinking. My bet is they know exactly what they are doing.

Reply

Nathaniel Salzman Jul 18th, 2007 Link

Though it’s unfortunate that everything offered in one market isn’t available in all markets, I don’t really lament the loss of these options as I just don’t think a 1-2% increase in fuel efficiency is worth the added complication. The MINI, even my R53, is complex enough without gizmos in the wheel hubs and switching itself on and off like a light. The less the engine is running on low oil pressure (as it does on startup) the better in my opinion. There are smart steps towards efficiency, such as the electric power steering pump on the MINI, but then there are items like on/off oil and water pumps and recuperative breaking that just seem to me like they add more in complexity than we every really get back in efficiency. What if the A/C compressor were electric?

And if you the car buyer are that nit-picky about fuel efficiency, then maybe there ought to be a Prius in your future instead. Or drop the $60K on the all-electric Cooper. Or if I were going electric and had the green, I’d want a Tesla.

To each their own.

Reply

Crusoe Jul 18th, 2007 Link

Seems odd since many of us build to order our MINIs They could charge us for it no? I would bet it’s partly the cost and hassle of certifying it in the U.S. Fortunately the ’07s already get decent gas mileage.

Reply

Ron Jul 18th, 2007 Link

I’m not really surprised or bothered. The gear shift indicator? That’s just a gimmick anyway. The regenerative brakes might be nice but I kinda suspect that it has the least effect on increasing MPG of the new fuel saving features (except for the gear shift indicator of course).

And the start/stop thing, I bet once most people actually drove with it, they’d turn it off pretty quickly. Unless you are ultra frugal and importing your gasoline from the UK.

But maybe Nigel is right, MINI wants to focus on fixing the problems in the R56. I’m also crossing my fingers that they are trying to do something to fix all the problems that our lovely ethanol-ized gasoline is causing.

Reply

iNomis Jul 18th, 2007 Link

I would think these features would be less useful for a market like the US that has less city driving. Maybe EPA testing gave zero change with these features? Along with the increased price/cost and the smallest of reliability issues and I can understand leaving these out. I think our market it driving most of this decision.

Reply

mikeyjaro Jul 18th, 2007 Link

Any word about Canada?? Are we one in the same on this, or not? I mean we are getting the MINI D, so maybe.. maybe not…? Any idea Gabe?

Reply

nuvolari Jul 18th, 2007 Link

I say we can wait a year or two and let the euros deal with all the headaches of the first-gen verions of these features. Because there will be headaches.

Reply

gmini Jul 18th, 2007 Link

If it’s confirmed (upsetting as that is to me), why not remove the question mark in the title? The feeds are kind of misleading.

Reply

Gearhead Jul 18th, 2007 Link

I’m kind of relieved we’re not getting these features. I have some concerns about their transparency. Does anyone have any hands-on experience with the Mini implementation of this technology? I plan on getting the ‘08 R56 (waiting for any kinks to get worked out) and this news is a relief. Compared to the miniscule fuel savings I’d expect to see from gasoline saving features the complexity seems like too great a risk to the driving experience and long term reliability. I am sorry I won’t have the ability to purchase a diesel in the US. I’ve driven a friend’s diesel Passat and it’s very nice with great MPG.

Reply

Dave Jul 18th, 2007 Link

The reason these may not be coming is that most people simply don’t want to spend the money. The description makes this sound like a BAS (Belt-drive Alternator Starter) system. Think of it as a very simple hybrid. The alternator is replaced with a unit that has sufficient power to start the engine (extremely quickly, hence the auto stop) and possibly even provide a little acceleration boost, and provide regenerative braking. The downside is that the additional electronics and cooling system modifications are going to add in the range of $1500-2000 to the price of the car. Even if the fuel savings is 10%, at 30mpg, 12k miles per year, and $3/gallon gas, that’s only $120 savings per year. Hard to justify the investment. I love the idea, but I can’t afford it.

Reply

mini vanilli Jul 18th, 2007 Link

So glad i didn’t wait and got my 2007 MCS. I have been enjoying it for 3 months now!!!

Reply

Dennisr53 Jul 18th, 2007 Link

Say…is the quake that happened in Japan that affected the auto parts supplier plant gonna affect the Mini Cooper production?…I heard that the piston rings and the turbo blow-by valves are made in Japan….hmm.

Reply

gokartride Jul 18th, 2007 Link

I’d be more disappointed if I really thought it was going to happen. It was always iffy.

Reply

Richard Jul 18th, 2007 Link

If the reason is the cost, then Canada deserves these extras. For equally equipped 2007 mini cooper s’, we here in Canada pay about a $4500 premium over our American counterparts; our dollars are almost on par now.
I think Mini should throw in these extras to atleast somewhat justify the difference.

As a aside, the difference for a BMW is almost $11000 (on a C$54000 car)

Reply

Tim Jul 18th, 2007 Link

Nathaniel:

Normally I mostly agree with your posts, so I was surprised to hear you take this stand. My response to you would be this:

As far as I’m aware, these technologies have existed in hybrids for years. As such, I don’t think their reliability should be questioned. BMW is not pioneering this technology; Toyota and Honda have been using similar systems for years. BMW should be able to handle this.

In addition, I thought the benefit of these combined technologies was in the range of 10% and not 1 or 2% as you suggest. I could be wrong on this point, however.

I have to side with DB on this one. I’m really disappointed in this. I’ve always been a bit underwhelmed by my 03 S’s fuel economy. Since I do most of my driving in the city, I think that I’d greatly benefit from these technologies. The earth would benefit as well. I want to drive a MINI; I don’t want to drive a Prius.

Reply

jas cooper Jul 18th, 2007 Link

I thought the whole idea behind these technologies was not just to save money on gas but to reduce all the crap getting released into the atmosphere. If theyre more expensive why not offer them as options.

Seems like the oil companies are still pushing the buttons and that is why we dont see them or the highly efficient diesel on our shores.

It pisses me off almost as much as not being able to raise my windows automatically, or by pressing a button on my key fob.

These are not econoboxes, but most of us are paying upwards of $30k to own one.

I love my MCS but my opinion of the company that built it is declining rapidly.

Also on my list is having to pay almost $500 more to get a car in black. Or making the anthracite headliner a $200 option when it probably doesn’t cost a penny more to produce.

Reply

allenski Jul 18th, 2007 Link

I hope MINI can start on these new technologies in the U.S. for 2009.

However, I believe these technologies are for the Europeans who for example in the UK it’s 2 US dollars for every 1 British pound. I can only imagine how much money I’d be paying for fuel every month if I lived in the UK. Good Lord. There’s a higher incentive to have these technologies in European MINIS than US MINIS, if only to keep their market base satisfied.

All the same, I’d like to have save on paying for fuel in the US. But if I have to wait, then I’ll wait.

Reply

Nathaniel Salzman Jul 18th, 2007 Link

Nathaniel: Normally I mostly agree with your posts, so I was surprised to hear you take this stand.

Actually, I’ve railed against the on/off water and oil pumps since our first glance at the new powerplant. It’s not a question of BMW’s engineering prowess, but just the reality of having worked on enough cars to know that regardless of how well things are thought through, they still wear out and they still fail. So I’m a reasonable minimalist in that sense, especially when it comes to a car like the MINI. I love analog gauges and toggle switches and stuff that simply works and does its job. I’m not anti-technology, I’m just pro-simplicity.

For example, the “Alphabet Brakes” on the MINI utilize the ABS and wheel angle sensors to monitor wheel speeds relative to each other and also the steering angle. So with one set of sensors, multiple systems like EBD, CBC, ASC, and DSC can utilize one set of components to make the car safer. That’s awesomely elegant. Likewise, little things like the toggles – one set of switches for the doors and windows rather than a set in each door and all the extra wiring that goes with.

Conversely, going from a simple alternator to as many as 4 hub-mounted alternators is using 6 components to do the job of one. And I just don’t see the efficiency pay-off as being high enough on a car like the MINI to justify the complexity. Recuperative braking makes sense on a car like the Prius because you’re trying to feed a gigantic battery. But on a MINI, I’d rather just have one less thing to go wrong.

The other half of my mindset is that unlike a lot of car buyers, I don’t intend to ever trade in my MINI. It’s sort of a family tradition. My dad’s first brand new car was a 1969 MGb GT. He still drives it. So I’m much more interested in car components I don’t have to worry about ten years from now than I am in going 15 miles further on a given tank of gas.

But that’s me.

Reply

mikeyjaro Jul 18th, 2007 Link

I think i figured it out.. The US$ is worth less and less against all major currencies, and there is nothing to stop the devaluation.. And with a huge portion of worldwide sales in the US, along with a price that is below any other market – perhaps BMW has finally drawn its line in the sand. For too long, others have been ‘paying for’ the US slumping dollar. We are now at a US$ so low, that economies of scale aren’t enough anymore.. my 2 cents anyway..

Reply

Crashton Jul 18th, 2007 Link

Well for me, that is good news. I wouldn’t have bought a MINI with that stuff on it. If I want a Prius I’ll buy a Prius.

Reply

Ian F Jul 18th, 2007 Link

Mikey may have a point…

unfortunately, the proposed fuel saving tech was the only reason I was considering a switch from my current TDI daily driver to an R56. Now it looks like that won’t happen… I simply drive too much to give up the mpg I get with the TDI.

So the end result for me is that MINI has probably lost a sale. :(

Reply

Ken Cooper Jul 18th, 2007 Link

As I saw it, the best feature on my Prius was the gas engine shut-off each time I had to wait at a stop light. When your engine shuts down each time as you stop at traffic light after traffic light you become very aware of the other vehicles around you and of just how much gas is being wasted and how much crap is being spewed into the environment.

How dare BMW have that technology and not include it on cars exported to the U.S. What a bunch of AHs. I’m guessing that the ever demanding air quality requirements in Europe are behind BMWs decision. If our administration wasn’t so tolerant from the standpoint of the environment we’d probably get that feature here too. We would more than likely demand that any cars imported into the U.S. be at least as clean, environment wise, as those sold by the same manufacturer in other countries.

This decision really makes me angry. Just the other day I recommended to an environment conscious neighbor that she wait for the ‘08 MINI Cooper for environmental reasons before buying. Now I’ll probably suggest she wait to see what Prius is doing in ‘08 before making her decision.

Reply

Xan Jul 18th, 2007 Link

http://www.treehugger.com/files/2007/07/a_picture_is_wo.php

For your reading pleasure as I think it directly applies to this article.

At more than $80 (US) to fill up a Honda Civic, it’s understandable why MINI would justify the additional cost for the mpg. Maybe sometime sooner rather than later we will be able to justify such investments.

Reply

Dave Mac Mini Jul 18th, 2007 Link

I would not want a car that shuts down at every stop, so I am happy that these “features” will not be offered on this side of the pond. My R56 is already about 15 percent more fuel efficient than my R53 was, but I did not buy the car for economy. I like the looks, the handling and the performance. There are lots of cars that get better mileage than a MINI, and if that is important to you, buy one of them, but please leave this junk off the MINI. And, what’s all this about the “check engine” light? I have had my R56 for a few months now, and I have never seen this problem.

Reply

Glen B. Jul 18th, 2007 Link

The auto/stop and regenerative braking are features that BMW has offered for sale in BMW 1’s in Europe for several years now. I’m not worried one bit about their reliability. I was very much looking forward to trading in my R52 for a new R56 with these energy saving features. It makes no sense that our engines continue to drink fuel and spew exhaust while waiting 90 seconds for traffic lights to turn. I want a MINI that is also as good for the environment and national security as is technically possible. Shame on BMW for failing to bring these features to the U.S. now. I hope they do so within a year.

Reply

Pretzel Cooper Jul 18th, 2007 Link

As another former Prius owner, I second what Ken Cooper said. If it doesn’t affect the MINI’s performance or reliability (currently an open question, I admit), then why kvetch about the fuel- and emissions-saving technology? When I’m looking for a replacement for my ‘04 CVT in 2009, I hope to find a MINI D or an S with that technology built in. If not, then I’ll seriously consider a VW TDI or a Honda diesel. Not to get political here, but if you’re not part of the solution, then you’re part of the problem (climate change, environmental degradation, overdependence on foreign oil, etc.).

Reply

allenski Jul 18th, 2007 Link

Going back to the point of view of the first post (DB’s post), if all this so called “junk” that some you call it doesn’t affect performance, then why not have it included on the MINI? The fuel effecient features certainly isn’t going to change the looks, and I daresay that it’s not going to affect the handling either.

Reply

Dennisr53 Jul 18th, 2007 Link

Is it true that the resale value of a hybrid goes down rapidly when the hybrid car/suv reaches 10 or 15 years old….due to the expensive requirement of changing the whole battery pack at that age?….I do know the recycleable batteries “doesnt” have much impact on the environment…etc…also…it eats up much space

I remembered my neighbors saying that the “new” hybrid technology car they had was having a tiny bit of trouble starting during the cold winters during their intro…but I know its all resolved….hopefully…

and I do know that the hybrid technology described above does not truly apply to the Fuel saving technology that Mini CarCo offers in the UK etc…

smiling…Happy Motoring…!

Reply

Timothy Jul 18th, 2007 Link

Say…is the quake that happened in Japan that affected the auto parts supplier plant gonna affect the Mini Cooper production?

No. Here in Japan, the quake mainly affected Niigata prefecture, and even there the real earthquake damage was to older homes rather than industrial facilities. (The nuclear power plant is the notable exception. A fire broke out, and TEPCO wasn’t prepared.) Automobile-related manufacturing in Japan is centered around Nagoya, far from the earthquake’s epicenter. Also, because Japan is so far from the Oxford plant, there’s considerable inventory nearer the factory and also possibly enroute. That long supply distance gives both manufacturers some flexibility in any parts shortage situation.

In Tokyo we got a couple shakes (slightly larger in the morning on Monday, an aftershock in the afternoon) but no damage. I think Nagoya was about the same or less. The most interesting part (to me, anyway) is that earthquakes actually last many, many seconds. It’s not just one shake but more like pond ripples which keep going for a while.

We were actually very lucky. The last earthquake of this magnitude in the same area killed over 90 people.

Reply

Nathaniel Salzman Jul 18th, 2007 Link

…it doesn’t affect performance, then why not have it included on the MINI? The fuel effecient features certainly isn’t going to change the looks, and I daresay that it’s not going to affect the handling either.

The extra unsprung weight of recuperative breaking system might actually make a handling difference – like putting the S-lites back on for those who really seem to care about that. ;-)

You never get something for nothing. I think if you’re looking for über fuel economy, a MINI even with 1-2% efficiency from this kind of technology isn’t going to get you there. This doesn’t irritate me nearly as much as not being able to get a Cooper D in the states. That’s a car that would actually be on my radar if I were looking for huge MPG numbers – and I think a practical candidate for this kind of extra technology. But since the MCD isn’t available here, not getting these extra bits isn’t much of a loss or really much of a surprise.

Reply

Dennisr53 Jul 18th, 2007 Link

Thanks Timothysan for the info…according to other websites….Toyota, Subaru, Mazda, among others are stopping their factory lines for a few days…just to accommodate the supplies-shortfall…

Am dreaming about the all new WRX-STi new design…hopefully its not as bad as the 08 WRX…thats why I am still deciding on whether to get the R56 or to keep my R53…

In the Meantime…Happy Motoring…

Reply

SB Jul 18th, 2007 Link

I thought I read that the BMW 1 series was also going to offer this in 08. If that is right then does that mean it will be dropped for it as well?

Reply

Shamus Jul 18th, 2007 Link

Nathaniel,

I completely agree with your stand on ‘elegant simplicity’. The argument for, or against, this technology seems to fall along the lines of those who have worked on their own cars, and those who haven’t. Fitting squarely within the first group, I can attest to the reliability issues that plague highly-cycled parts. Non-mechanics don’t seem to realize that everything that moves has a lifespan not rated in years, months or days, but in cycles. Cycle a part often enough and it will eventually fail, no matter how well designed. The funny thing is, it’s usually the smallest possible thing that fails, a spring, switch, or valve that shuts everthing down.

All I need is for my car to refuse to start while I’m stopped at a traffic light and I’ll be in big trouble! Prius lovers out there only need press the accelerator and the electric motor will continue to drive the car without the gas engine. This technology is going in the right direction, but I don’t believe it’s the final answer.

ps. I don’t think the regenerative braking is the same as a full electric car’s in-wheel system pulled from the drive motors. It’s more likely a single generator, driven off of the transmission, post-engine, pre-wheels.

Reply

Timothy Jul 18th, 2007 Link

The major reason why certain Japanese employers may be offering time off to their employees is so that they can take care of home affairs in earthquake-affected areas. There should be no technical reason in the vast majority of cases for shutting down the production lines. Japanese companies treat their employees almost like family — they are still extremely social institutions, and life employment is still quite common. If someone’s relative’s home collapsed, I would expect employers to be very generous in allowing time off work.

In rare cases, in every country, there’s load shedding from the electric grid. The earthquake caused several nuclear plants to automatically go offline, and industrial users sometimes contract for discretionary power supply. I haven’t heard that that’s still going on — I believe most of the plants are back online now — but it is theoretically possible.

I doubt any of that will affect MINI at all, especially with the long supply route.

Reply

GregW Jul 19th, 2007 Link

Japan is quite a large country. Are all these extra and electronic gizmos absolutely necessary to sell more cars? It’s all about BMW’s crusade to save the planet by trying to demonstrate more fuel efficient cars. And the reason that is because they have put their eggs in one basket with hydrogen fuel project (see 7 series). No plans for electric cars either. Meanwhile the new M3 is a gas guzzler. Another strategy is to add more junk onto the car instead of reducing the price. To me MINI Cooper is about a sports car with the basic necessities. I don’t really want a “luxury” version. But they market the car as a “premium” hatchback so all the extra stuff has to be added to up-spec the car over competitiors. Electric brakes and stop/start are a “turn off”.

Reply

Dave S. Jul 19th, 2007 Link

MINI/BMW, WAKE-UP!! Just bring a turbo diesel engine option to the US market! VW says it’s going to have an all new 50 state legal turbo diesel here in the next two years…Get with the program. I would rather deal with a new “clean” running turbo diesel then with all the complex problems of auto/stop, regenerative braking and a Belt-drive Alternator Starter system…all for a 10% savings in fuel. If I wanted a Prius I would buy a Prius.

Reply

Bob Jul 19th, 2007 Link

Does BMW not do any demographic studies? Look how the Prius is selling. Some people in the US do want to save the earth from global warming. Also we need the diesel. Look at the way a Diesel Jetta is holding its value. Maybe this is a sign that BMW does not care either. If this is their attitude, I will look elsewhere and so will a lot of other people. BMW is missing the point. Bring the diesel and the fuel saving technology to the USA. Promote it right and it will sell. Mini is the only decent small car that offers a diesel. It will sell here. I would put down a deposit today if it was available.

Reply

Timothy Jul 19th, 2007 Link

The new U.S. diesel engines are rather complex, though. A shift indicator light is comparatively simple. :-)

Reply

iNomis Jul 19th, 2007 Link

Are we over and under thinking what the Brake Energy Regeneration is? As Shamus said, You really just need a clutch on the alternator and then run it when your foot is off the gas and the engine is above idle or when you need to charge the battery. I’m sure they used a higher output alternator matched to the new battery but it doesn’t need to be that complex a system or weigh a significant amount more. That’s why the gains are so slight, but it’s easy to do and probabably will show up on more cars.

The upside is that with the alternator disengaged, you will actually have more power at the wheels! Perhaps that could now be part of the 30 sec boost mode?

Reply

Chad Jul 19th, 2007 Link

If you could offer a diesel MINI with these advanced features and get 55+ MPG by US standards, but charged $10000 more, you wouldn’t sell a lot of them. BUT… those you did sell would make a tidy profit still, and you would get a lot of good press and PR, and you would raise the average cost of a MINI, so that someone might think “Well, I might have spent $30,000 on a MINI, but at least I didn’t blow $40,000 like those tree-huggers over there.” The gas mileage of the R56 is admirably imporved over the previous model, but it’s not going to get the same green shopper that looks at a TDI or hybrid.

Reply

Garrett in SF Jul 19th, 2007 Link

I recently had to give up my beloved Mini Cooper S Convertible due to a back injury. (I could no longer drive a stick … and the sport seats were killing me.) Anyway, I ended up leaving the Mini family to a Prius in large part due to the MPG. In the 3 years I had my Mini, I never got more the 18 MPG in city (where I do most of my driving). I admit, I have a lead foot, but I expected MUCH better than that. If Mini would have had a diesel or any other MPG increasing engines available, I probably would have stayed.

Reply

Nigel Jul 19th, 2007 Link

How come I manage to get 24-25MPG driving spiritedly in my R53 S right here in the city?

“Lead Foot” is really an understatement. To make only 18MPG in a 1st gen S you must have been shifting near or at redline all the time. Wow!

Reply

Nigel Jul 19th, 2007 Link

Mark my words….June/July 2008 MINIUSA will issue a press release announcing the Dooper availability for the ‘09 model year….

Reply

Bilbo Baggins Jul 22nd, 2007 Link

Nigel Jul 18th, 2007 Link They fear mounting warranty claims and problems that may creep up from these emerging technologies. Actually BMW might be doing the US consumer a favor by not adding these features into US spec cars. But from the fuel saving point of view, I am also dissapointed. Lawyers and Beancounters are clearly at the helm of BMW these days…

I think that you make a very good point. The USA is definitely over run with people looking for any excuse to try to sue someone else. I do not blame any manufacturer for not wanting to introduce a potential warranty issue. It is just this attitude that drives up the cost of doing business in the USA. The manufacturers have to have their own lawyers on staff and carry millions, if not billions, of dollars in insurance to prevent law suits from bankrupting their companies. It is a real shame that that is what it has come down to. We all pay for these large settlements each and every day.

Rant over.

Reply

Bob Jul 22nd, 2007 Link

I have an ‘03 Cooper, which I enjoy very much. But I was looking forward to the ‘08 models, maybe a Clubman, or maybe another Cooper. As a response to the disapointing news from MINI, yesterday I Test Drove a Mazda and looked at a Saturn. I’m a bit put out. Fuel economy is important to me and to my country (America) that’s one of the reasons I like the MINI – Fuel Economy! Remember; Lets Sip. Billboards touting; Big Cars – Gas station at next exit? I can (sort of) understand that BMW, can’t or wont, make their diesel run clean enough for US EPA standards because its either to costly or not worth the effort (too costly). But I’ve yet to meet anyone who didn’t breathe the same air as I do. As the Jet Stream brings China’s pollution to America’s west coast, our pollution is taken to Europe, and so on. Think about that. Ok I can’t get a MINI D, but not to worry, MINI’ll make a higher milage car. So you’re the new MINI wont use as much petrol, and as a result make less pollution. But they’re not going to sell it in the US. Fuelish! If MINI uses fuel saving devises in the rest of the world, then they should be used here as well. I for one will be contacting Mini USA & BMW about this and I would ask others to do the same. Respectfully, Bob

Reply

Rob Jul 26th, 2007 Link

The decision to leave these fuel saving features out of US bound MINIs must be based on economic considerations. If the technology is good enough for the European market, then it should be good enough for any market. I think the MINI is faced with a falling dollar that is squeezing profitabilty of its US operations and quite possibly forcing it to raise prices in the US. Addtional features would require raising the price of the car and thus cut into sales.

I am a potential first -time MINI buyer who places a very high priority on fuel efficiency for environmental reasons. Of course, I also want the speed and fun that a MINI can offer. I am disappointed that I will not have the opportunity to purchase a car with the latest fuel saving technology, but I can understand the reason why.

Reply

hardy Nov 13th, 2007 Link

I think Rob you are probably right..I for one am a current mini owner but want even better economy that europeans enjoy already and would love the 2008 D with stop start and would pay for it, and mad that I cant even get half that equation. I am perplexed by people who are afraid of the stop start on this board and others. It quite clearly states in mini press release literature for euro spec that the on/off will not engage when the engine is cold, or it is really hot outside for the A/C etc…you can also read about reviews that cite no delay in response (why do people think it will be like cranking your engine over a few times in the morning?It’s not the same thing as a “regular start”)…and if you are THAT wary of it you can turn it off. And its not like its some obscure option…it is STANDARD for all non US 2008 models. I think they know what they are doing. Currency pressure certainly, but also marketing BS at the helm.

Reply