Automotive Design & Production not only touches on the MINI’s new powerplants in its latest issues but the overall design as well. The following is an excerpt from an article that talks about the new car’s design in-depth with Gert Hildebrand – head of MINI design:
>Hildebrand said that they started working on the vehicle back in 2001-2002, when the first vehicle was still new. “An early decision we made was that we didn’t want to change it dramatically, that we wanted to have an evolutionary design process.” He cites the examples of vehicles like the Porsche 911 and the VW Golf, cars that have advanced through gradual though perceptible changes, or what Hildebrand describes as “steps big enough to create desire, but safe enough to have recognizability for the customers.”
>In fact, the perceptions of customers are crucial to Hildebrand’s approach to design. Speaking of when changes are proposed during a development program, he says, “When we go through the design process with my team, I question them until they convince me they’ve done something for a reason, not just because ‘I like it.’ ‘I like it’ is not enough. The customer has to like it. My designers don’t have to like it.”
You can read the rest of the article below:
[ The Credibility Of Continuity At Mini ] Automotive Design & Production
I would have asked the following:
1. Was there anything wrong stylisticly (i.e. what didnt you like)with the previous model?
2. How do you improve on perfection?
The subject has been beat to death but I do have an odd take on it now.
When I see the R56 in pictures I still dislike it but when viewed in person it’s not half bad. I still don’t see me buying one but buying a GP instead if I ever sell enough GP T’s. When I see the center stack in pictures I still find it odd but in person, again, NHB. The beltline is still odd no matter where I see it.
I personally believe they did a good job with the new R56, of course there are things about my r53 I still like better but have a feeling that in a short while the R56 is what is going to look right to my eye.
I am sure their redesign wasn’t based on disliking the styling of the R53 but rather wanting to make a viable car for the future.
As for perfection all I can say is perfection doesn’t exist. As a simple proof of this if it did we would have no great aftermarket tuners. I believe what they gave us with the R53 was a solid base to be able to make into something we wanted. The thing I wish to see is how over the long haul the R56 stacks up on being as strong of a base to build on.
I just hope that future evolution of the MINI does not fall prey to the bloat that most other manufacturers introduce into new designs. Why do new designs need to be bigger, wider, longer? New Honda Fit = old Civic, new Civic = old Accord, and so on. This seems to happen across the board. I understand the reasons for increasing the size of the R56 but hope there is always such a valid reason.
OH Steve – I agree. Why does the next new model always have to be bigger than the previous?
Examples – Mazda 323 Familia, VW Golf, BMW 3 series.
The above mentioned cars have always gotten bigger model to model. Now they are mid-size saloons. The problem is that seeing BMW 3 series got bigger they had to make a new small model, the 1 series.
If MINI wants to get bigger why not build a longer/bigger 4 door saloon and call it the MIDI.
For the R56 I doubt whether there is any more room in the back seats than the previous model.
Sure, change things that don’t quite look right or function, but “if it ain’t broke, don’t try and fix it”.
“Design” = raised belt line for pedestrian safety mandates. “Styling” = overly large speedometer? I think they could have got a bit more creative in the radio placement if they wanted to narrow the console.