BusinessWeek on the Clubman’s Design
BusinessWeek has a fantastic article about some of the trials and tribulations that MINI went through with the design process on the new MINI Clubman. Here’s an excerpt:
>In updating the Clubman, (Gert) Hildebrand stuck closely to the concept car shown at the 2005 Frankfurt Auto Show which featured the split rear doors of the original Mini Clubman Estate (1960s) and the Morris Mini Traveller (1959). “The split doors are unique,” says the 53-year-old German designer. “When you open them, the rear taillight remains stuck on the car like goggles or glasses.”
>But Hildebrand made one huge departure from the past with the introduction of the “Clubdoor”-a rear passenger door on the right side of the vehicle, which has no exterior handle and can only be opened from the inside when the front door is also open (for safety). The Clubman door opens in the opposite direction to the main front door, to make it easier to get in the back seat.
>The question is whether the highly individualistic Mini crowd will embrace it. “Butterfly doors are something every designer wants to do. But they are a bit of a risk,” says Christoph Stürmer, senior researcher at Global Insight in Frankfurt, noting that few automakers historically have dared give a nod to such doors-and that Mini buyers prefer to put their own stamp of originality on the car. But, Hildebrand insists, “It’s a comfort door. It’s hidden functionality.”
>Hildebrand spent four years on the Clubman’s design, tussling daily with BMW’s engineers over the complexity introduced by the Clubman door and the split rear doors and taillights.
The full (and highly recommended) article can be found below:
[ Mini Clubman, Big on Design ] BusinessWeek
The problem with the rear “comfort” door and the split barn doors in the back is that neither setup is truly practical in the real world. A rear hatch is easier to live with as with a “normal” rear door.
I think the greatest challenge the Clubman will face is in RHD markets where the Comfort door faces the side of traffic. This compromise in the design can put a damper to buyers looking to use the car as a family hauler in those markets.
Something tells me the rear comfort door will be short lived and a future Clubman facelift could bring either a pair of rear doors or normal opening rear doors, or may be, no rear doors at all.
From the point of view of the MINI enthusiast as someone who apreciates these design “quirks”, I think the Clubman will be like no other car on the road and that paired with the added “practicality” is the reason I will be getting one in the first place.
I think Gert Hildebrand has risen to the ocassion with the Clubman design work. While I personally was less impressed with his R56 rendition, I think the Clubman can prove the skiptics of his design talent, that Gert, is indeed someone that after all is said and done, deserves his rightful place as the chief of MINI design.
-Nigel
I don’t think either door style is going to be a big issue sales-wise even in the UK. I think most will forgo opening the suicide door most the time. In any market people will slide the seat fwd, plant their face on the dash/steering and fold the seat back fwd without ever getting out. The suicide door is marginally practical and the rear doors offer wide open access to a squaresque opening though impractical for closing.
I guess in the urban UK they could learn to pull the 180 handbrake parking maneuver if they really wanna use the suicide door.
<blockquote>…the split rear doors of the original Mini Clubman Estate (1960s) and the Morris Mini Traveller… (1959).</blockquote>
Journalists just can’t get the historical model names and facts right can they? Both the Traveller and the <em>Countryman</em> were introduced in 1960. They were identical other than their bonnet badges saying either “Austin” or “Morris” and the patterns of the front grilles differing. The Clubman name didn’t arrive until 1969 and simply identified a square-nosed Mini. Sure an estate (station wagon) was <em>one</em> of the Clubman models offered, but not the only one. I’ve got no issues with MINI using the Clubman name differently now on the new model, but I still think “Traveller” would have been a better choice and would have communicated the purpose of the new car a bit better.
Bruce, I agree. Clubman really has no real meaning in the minds of Americans, specially those that have no knowledge of the history of the car.
Traveller would have been indeed a much better moniker to use.
I really like the doors in question, but would have preferred a hatch in the rear if only to bring the cost of the car down. I don’t see that the added cost of the rear doors translates to added utility. Then there’s the weight issue…
IIRC the Traveler name could not be used due to copyright/trademark issues in various countries.
>IIRC the Traveler name could not be used due to copyright/trademark issues in various countries.
Additionally it also means “woman of the night” in several key European markets.
I was disappointed to see the the “club” door added. Hildebrand insists, “It’s a comfort door. It’s hidden functionality.” But it’s not hidden functionality. It’s very visible when compared to the sleaker driver side. Also, it would have been nice to see the Clubman as presented as a concept make it to production. The clubman could have really stood out as its own, rather than a stretched MINI.
The original concept was a looker. But quite frankly, much of what was shown in the 3 Traveller concepts would have made it past the concept stage.
The concepts have longer doors and bigger door openings to allow for easier access to the rear seat. But as it is, the MINI already has huge doors for a car its size. Have you tried opening your MINI doors when you have less than 12 inch clearence between your car and the next?
Like I said, Gert Hildebrand deserves credit for having implemented some of these risque design elements in the R55, but overall, he is not my favorite auto designer. He appears to be an incredible human being and someone that is genuinely passionate for the MINI brand, but as a designer, he just doesn’t have the mojo of the likes of Frank Stephenson, at least not in my book.
I’ve read everything you guys are saying but I disagree mostly with everything. I had a very hard time looking at the Clubman at first. It made me uneasy- as I have said many times and to many people ( mostly auto designers and artist) But that is a good thing in my mind because we are being trained by the Automotive world to accept less as more. Well that principle only works when you give more and make it into less. But most car companies are just giving us less all around and I now see he (Hildebrand)was trying to give the people more which can only be done in Odd ways in this day of fighting for every detail with the Corporate penny pincher’s and conformist. The Clubman in my opinion is the closest thing I have seen to a great auto of this type since the VW squareback. I believe the only elements that BMW is leaving out from a designers perspective is small details like Strips of polished aluminum instead of plastics and some truly unique groundbreaking colour swatch’s. But you cant have everything so I simply say be thankful this vehicle even made it to the light of day in this age of boring conformity.
Lotus, well said. In the big scheme of things the Clubman is a very interesting car, hence the reason I am lining up for one.
lotus-3,
I agree with what you are saying about Hildebrand wanting to give more to the consumer and overall like what he did with the Clubman to get it to market. I understand the economics of things in order to make it happen, but from a design standpoint, why model the Clubman strictly from the new MINI generation rather than have it carry similarities to it and have its own identity as was with the classic Traveller?
Nigel,
I’m not so sure about the size of the doors since I didn’t see it in the flesh. Do you know how much longer they were. I do remember seeing how the seat swivelled allowed for ease of access for the passengers, which I thought was ingenious for keeping the lines pure and simple. Reminiscent of the classic.
All in all, I am just another designer with a particular perspective, and respect both of your viewpoints.
Risque design elements? Is that like pasties? No wonder they couldn’t use Traveller, they had their ‘R’ rating already. 😉 The risky part was having any assymetrical design elements at all – that doesn’t usually fly unless it’s almost invisible, and the coach door is fairly well integrated, so I think it will be more useful than it first appears. Nothing like having for’ard access when you’re loading in the lumber.
The reason the Clubman is so close to the Cooper and not like the concepts is to reuse nearly all the same parts from the front seats forward. So cost and corporate conformity was a big factor. Maybe that was the deal with Hildebrand, “you can do anything you want from the front seats to the boot.”
From what I’ve seen of the way they’re pitching the clubdoor, it’s not being pitched as an element to allow greater entry for people into the back, it’s being pitched as a door that will allow greater loading and unloading access to the back seat. From this perspective, I think it’ll be a really handy thing. I load big things into my mini all the time but I only do it from the back cause there’s not enough room to do it from the front.
I’m not so sure that having the door on the drivers side in right hand drive markets will be a bad thing either. When I load and unload things into my car, it’s usually in my driveway or someone else’s – therefore there are no issues with traffic interaction. But I tell you what, it’ll be a lot easier to do all the opening and closing on the drivers side, than having to walk around to the passengers side to do it 😉
How about a 4wd Clubman S JCW for World Rally Competition?
I would not buy a non turbo clubman!
Hildebrand had four years to come up with the suicide door on RH side only?.
For those that were not around in 1960s/70s;
Austin Seven Countryman.
Morris Mini Traveller (two L’s).
Leyland Mini Clubman Estate
Cliff Notes of MINI Door Design.
Chapter 1. Epiphany on a Wet Afternoon
Where to put the gas cap, where, oh where? We want a door there now, so we have to re-design the WHOLE FREAKIN’ CAR? Oh…yeah…we’ll just drop one of the “convenience” doors.
Chapter 2. As clever Herr Hildebrand sez, “The plot thickens”
See, if we have barn-doors in back, it looks bitchin’, and we’d be the only ones with enough guts to do it right – a triumph of BMW engineering, ja?
I imagine it was more involved than this, but the salient features are there. Tradition is maintained, boring design is defeated. And left-hookers, hallelujah, rejoice – by dumb luck, we holed out – the door is on our curbside!
I’m loving the “Clubman” more and more, and when I get mine it will be a lean, mean, fuel-sipping machine. I love my MCS, but there is something about having it all – great handling, room for my little girl’s stuff AND near 40 mpg on the highway.
I’ll also be purchasing the first factory-look “Traveller” badge that comes out! That “woman of the night” comment got me for sure.
I guess I have less anguish about which side the suicide door is on because I can’t recall the last time that I parked alongside a curb. Virtually everywhere I go (work, mall, etc.) has a parking lot. At home, my cars reside in the garage where cars belong! 🙂 Additionally, since the driver is the only person in my car 90% of the time, I could actually see where having the suicide door on the same side as the driver would be convenient to access stuff in the back seat (compared to getting out of the car and walking around to the opposite side). That said, having the suicide door for me is mostly a convenience to aid in loading and unloading stuff.
I very much see a Clubman parked in my garage in the future!
Oops… I just read that we are supposed to call the suicide door the “clubdoor”. Now there’s a new entry for the Websters and Oxford dictionaries!
I am still not impressed with the R56 (no I have not driven it Gabe) and the only way I would consider one is if it gets a butt lift and a factory JCW package. The more I see and read about the Clubman, the more convinced I become that it will be my next car (only with factory JCW of course 😉 ). For the record, I thought the traveller concepts were ugly so I ignored the car until recently. I am 31 and Nigel also likes the car so there is proof that the “somewhat younger” crowd will not dismiss the car. Of couse, I have always liked sports wagons for their versitility, even when some people I know were still driving K-car wagons with 8 tracks, Ack.
rawth99, Like you I will mostly use the club door to load “stuff”, not people. Driver’s side is preferable to maximize garage space but passengers side is OK.
<blockquote>I love my MCS, but there is something about having it all – great handling, room for my little girl’s stuff AND near 40 mpg on the highway.
</blockquote>
i’m intrigued now, ron, what is all this “little girl’s stuff” of yours that you need room for?