3rd Gen MINI could use Fiat Platform
Autoblog, via Automotive News, has some interesting information about the upcoming ’15 MINI that is to be built in conjuction with Fiat.
>It’s unclear whether the C-Evo architecture will underpin the MINI AWD compact utility vehicle, but according to Automotive News, the platform will be capable of housing both front-wheel- and all-wheel-drive powertrains, and will serve as the platform for the new Alfa Romeo 147, which will be released sometime next year.
We talked about BMW and fiat joining forces on some components last week. This, I’m sure for some of you, is just a little more fuel for the fire.
[ Biggie MINI could use Fiat Platform ] Autoblog
<blockquote>However, a new platform developed by Fiat and dubbed the C-Evo will be used as the basis for a larger MINI, due out in 2015.</blockquote>
Larger? I know it’s all just rumors, but for goodness sake, could we please not bloat successive generations of this car? It’s not as though its diminutive size has hurt sales. MINI can’t build them fast enough, why make it bigger? Ick.
Hmmm. Shelby was right about getting into bed with a car manufacturer, and I’m hoping Beemer is the dominant partner here, cause if there’s even a remote possibility you’re gonna screw things up beyond salvaging, best if you don’t have to depend on a safeword that could lose something in translation.
I have no issues with Fiat and BMW working together, generally a good thing for both dealers. No doubt that BMW is going to be the dominate partner.
The ever increasing size of the Mini brand though does concern me. Unlike BMW/Mini management I do feel that there is a size limit that should be part of the brand. I for one don’t think Mini has to be everything to every possible owner.
If this ‘larger’ MINI is the next planned variant/version of the MINI softroader, then fine, but if they make the Cooper on a shared platform and any larger than it is, it looks like my current MINI will be my last.
Lots of commenters here already jumping the gun. Relax! 2015 is still 7 years and 2 US presidents away! Lotsa things can happen between here and then.
Gotta throw my 2 cents in here just in case someone who matters at Mini reads this. And let me start by saying the R56 is my second favorite car and I’m not trying to re-start controversy.
But PLEASE do not make this car bigger! It was already close to ruined IMO with the ’07 (weight not withstanding). The “pedestrian standard” excuse is bogus as I have not seen a single other european car(especially BMW) get an ugly swollen hood. And the extra length robbed the car of it’s “go cart” look/feel. Interior looks are not germaine to this thread so I won’t go there (gak).
I drank the R56 kool-aid and after 2500 miles barfed it back up. A larger 3rd gen Mini will never be in my garage. Please don’t go the way of the T-Bird!
The Prince Engine is taller than the Tritec, hence the taller bonnet height.
The bonnet is higher to accommodate EU Pedestrian safety rules as well. More cushion should a wayward walker end up going end first onto the bonnet.
It is an universally accepted fact that the EU pedestrian safety rules are ruining auto design.
Ironically, one of the design requirements of the R50 MINI was to have a low shoulder/bonnet line. This decision in part of BMW automatically dismissed the Rover 4-cyl engine as a suitable powerplant for what was to become the original New MINI. BMW didn’t want a Rover engine in the car either and this prompted their search for a suitable engine and this is how they ended up with Chrysler and the Tritec joint venture.
The R56 is in many ways a reversal of many of the design requirements that made the first generation car such an appealing design.
C4. You are the first one to offer a reasonable answer to my question pertaining to the hood. THANK YOU!
This presents two more questions. Why are other turbo charged cars not saddled with a bulbous hood? And what other european car suffers from euro pedestrian specs? I would feel better if I saw just one!
Hopefully Mini will get a different engine than the Prince for gen 3.
DB. Why did you offer the same answer I didn’t want to hear for the 1000th time? I don’t buy it! No other euro car has a high bonnet.
My biggest issue is that BMW has a long term habit of growing their cars at each redesign in size and weight. To me it seems they are following this path already with Mini. I have a lot of trust in BMW/Mini to not screw this up, but so far their decisions for the r53 to r56 and with the R60 looming starting to get the feeling that some of my trust with them is misplaced.
C4… The interior is also very reminiscent of rejected designs for the first version of the MINI. MINI.CA had the rejected designs posted many years ago (if I still had my old blog around, I could look it up, but alas, it’s gone), but they were pulled a few months later.
>DB. Why did you offer the same answer I didn’t want to hear for the 1000th time? I don’t buy it! No other euro car has a high bonnet.
Some Google searching …
<a href="http://blog.wired.com/cars/2007/11/will-pedestrian.html" rel="nofollow">Wired, 2007</a>
You will find by reading that article the following.
>(snip)…<b>Spurred by a battery of European Union laws written to curb the ever-growing number of pedestrians who die each year in crosswalk collisions with cars,</b>(/snip)
How it pertains to a Jaguar. Bold print is me.
I also found this.
>In November 2003, the Council adopted a directive on pedestrian safety with the aim to reduce deaths and injuries of pedestrians involved in traffic accidents through changes to the construction of the front of vehicles. The proposal is based on a voluntary agreement signed by European, Japanese and Korean car makers in 2001 and 2002.
<b>Update</b>. I also found <a href="http://www.edmunds.com/ownership/safety/articles/122731/article.html" rel="nofollow">this article at Edmunds</a> that describes what is going on in Automotive design as it relates to safety, both in the US and Europe. Great read if you have the chance.
I don’t have time to look for the actual letter of the EU law that requires this, but I’m sure someone out there will help me out.
In the case of the MINI, we get a hood that is slightly more bulbous than it was on the R50/R53. It’s easier for them to build them all the same, cheaper too. And, with a key component such as the bonnet, it’s built into the design.
There are lots of Euro cars with high bonnets. The Beetle comes readily to mind, as do all the new Suzukis and Kias.
I understand that many of you don’t like/appreciate the look of the R56. That is your opinion and you are more than welcome to it.
The new Fiat 500 also complies with EU pedestrian standards. I think the higher stock ride of the R56 and belt line accentuate the taller bonnet design. To my eyes, this works better on the Clubman because it has a taller roofline, squared off back end, longer wheelbase, taller windows and what appears to be a slightly lower ride height (But I could be wrong).
Rocketboy, I remember seeing those early interior sketches as well. I want to take a look on one of my MINI history books and see if I can find some of those old drawings. If I find them, I’ll scan them.
Wow. Whenever I visit “MF” I’m always amazed at the lack of info by some of you posters and the amazing amount of info that others have.
I have been coming here since it was Bridger.US. It’s just the best MINI blog going, even though it gets a bit nasty at times. I visit some 20-30 MINI blogs and Auto info sites daily. Many have the same info for weeks and months but not MF. Having my own MINI blog and store I can attest to the amount of time this all takes. Thanx Gabe & now DB for the fun, info and all that MotoringFile offers. And the rest of you… keep the rave on… it’s fun. :-]
The R56 didn’t last long in my garage either – for most of the reasons that Greg and C4 cite explicitly or otherwise allude to, and many more I could add concerning driving feel – whereas my R53 JCW is a keeper. Sad that there is a parallel between the growth and increasingly distant road feel of the E30 -> E36 -> E46 -> E90. They should start adding an extra E with each generation as for wider shoe sizes… E30 / EE36 / EEE46 / EEEE90!
…i know this is off topic, but as far as developments go, this would make the Clubman and any other non-coupe MINI infinitely more desirable…
…from Leftlane — “In another bit of Mini news, McDowell revealed that a 50-state legal diesel-powered Mini is headed to the U.S., but failed to mention a timeframe for launch. We can only image the waiting lists for a 50+ mpg version of the sporty hatch.”…
…is this blog-o-sphere crack-smoking or can anyone (read DB, Gabe, etc.) confirm this just yet???
DB. At first I thought you were providing a thoughtful answer. Who called you a liar? I didn’t. I know there are euro pedestrian regulations as they have been well documented on this site. Hence the “1000th time” remark. I simply stated that Mini is the ONLY euro car to observe them. Your example of the VW Beetle is incorrect as that design has existed for years before the regulation. Which european maker manufactures the Kia and Suzuki BTW? You mentioned Jaguar but which car? I didn’t notice any engorged hoods.
Take that offline buddy.
I agree, judging by BMW’s development history, MINI could keep getting bigger and heavier if BMW has a heavey hand in MINI’s development philosophy. Look at my M3 Sedan post, the latest M3 is 1000 lb heavier than the original M3, and even the 135 is only 40 lb less than the E46 M3. I have stopped buying BMW as a result of its bloated design philosophy.
When it comes to looks, the 2002 MINI is definitely superior in my book, both inside and out. The only thing better in the new car is the engine when it is not making its cold start noise.
Yes Jon and other commentators are correct – BMW has a habit of increasing the size of its range at every new model. Funny thing though they dont seem to get any bigger inside the cabins.
The first MINI was a Frank Stephenson and Rover design. R56 is a BMW design and probably why things are progressing down this path.
COME BACK FRANK!
You guys bash the preliminary designs but let me tell you, there are (still) few that provides the utility that the MC brings to the table.
My new JCW is my gas sipping daily driver, my comfort cruiser, my weekend mod toy (always something to get, install, wash, etc) and soon to be track car that will give me a rush that a very few affordable things can.
If you guys want to live in the past, so be it but the earth moves on. Mini moves on. Be happy with what you have, maybe for some, it’s time to get off the ride and quit worrying about the future. Enjoy the present.
I hear what your saying rs, I am not bashing the design. Rather as a long term fan of Mini I am expressing concern over its chosen path. A bigger Mini isn’t a better Mini.
BMW has done a lot right over the years but in this day and age of ever increasing gas prices I think the path “bigger is better” that they have followed for decades needs to end. If you want to make a performance car its always easier doing so on a lightweight platform. You want in increase the mileage, decrees the weight. While I love the 135i I do have to say that its physical size is great, however its badly bloated still, though not as bad as the M3. Yes they have excellent performance but can only do so by having massive power and torque.
I for one will stick with my R53’s for the indefinite future as they are the best solution for what I am looking for.
The only thing I like about the new R56 is its more efficient engine. Everything else seems like a downgrade.
I like the R56 because everything on it is an upgrade.
I from time to time check in here at MF just to see how things are going….
It is tough to read some of these comments and the lack of overall respect and inability for some to move on and let the past be. Things will never go back to the way they were it is plain and simple.
There are reasons for the increase in hood height and for the size of the cars in general and it is not because BMW wants to make them larger.
The hood design is b/c of the NCAP program and unlike what some of you would like to think, all manufacturers are following the same guidelines NOT just BMW/MINI. The reason the MINI appears to have more height than others is due to the size and proportions of the car as well as the general angles of the car. <a href="http://www.euroncap.com/cache/file/0664f270-3d50-40dc-ac2b-4a8e1e20277d/Euro-NCAP-Pedestrian-Protocol-Version-4.2.pdf" rel="nofollow">ENCAP pedestrian protocol</a>. If you view the other cars in its class <a href="http://www.euroncap.com/supermini.aspx" rel="nofollow">here</a> you will see that the MINI is not the only one with the bulbous nose. If you still would like to argue that point you obviously have not seen the Seat Ibiza lately…
Ignorance is bliss I suppose if it is mention 1000 times and you still think you are right, things will never change. It is not just the hood design, it is the impact zone so it has more to do with location and space than just overall height, the larger cars can hide it more. Part of the just released redesign on the BMW 3 series is to better meet the test scores as the prior design was not cutting it.
Onto the size of cars, the MINI is at an advantage in this area as it is a sub-compact/supermini and that is the intention; to be SMALL. That sounds great in theory b/c people buying want this car to be small and that is a bonus. That is until the government steps in and says that the new CAFE regulations for efficiency will be based on the “footprint” of the manufacturer. BMW is now at a disadvantage here because they do not produce any large behemoth pickup based SUVs like the Expedition or Suburban or even as large as the MB G, with most of the BMW models having small to medium footprints this means that the fleet avg. MPG will need to be higher than a company that produces larger more in efficient vehicles, this places them at a huge disadvantage for fines and cost of redevelopment. BMW was just named cleanest car in the UK and combined with MINI has increased efficiency overall more than any other manufacturer, and has been addressing efficiency a great deal so in order to “hit” their number it is more cost effective and easier to just increase the vehicle footprint, this is unfortunate but that is what happens when politicians create these rules based on what they are told by lobbyists.
In the end, the MINI brand is one of the most sought after in the world and has benefitted a great deal from BMW. Is the design different, absolutely but it is like all good things in life; they come to an end.
Who knows what the future has in store, these pedestrian rules may go away with the advent of external airbags for pedestrians and the look of the car will need to be based more on aerodynamics or pay a penalty. Things in the car word are fluid and adjust to regulations, technology and trends. Corvette owners complained when the flip lights were banned, now most love the new look of the lights a few years in….
I see the same thing in BMW land, people criticized Bangles initial designs for being too much, now people complain that the new designs are too bland. You can’t make all the people happy all the time, and you know life is to short to always complain; it gets old.
One final note: Gabe, DB and the rest of the staff here put forth a lot of effort and time to keep a site like this running, I think some people take that for granted.
I know how much time BF takes us and we are just getting rolling, so I give them a lot of credit and respect what they do and the overall concept they created.
On that I am out so bash away (as that seems like the thing to do).
Michael great to see you on the Mini side.
I Don’t think there is a lot of bashing just a lot of very passionate Mini fanatics. I would like to think that even when we disagree with each other or BMW/Mini that we still have respect for each other and accept the views being shared.
I also accept some of the changes on the R56 is strictly limited to the CAFE standards, however I am sure that some of the changes are related to BMW’s well documented increasing weight and size, I also feel a large portion of this isn’t related to making the car larger rather the end effect of “improving the car”. I also know that Mini cannot base all its future on its past, however I feel that developments like crossovers are pretty much turning their back completely on what the brand is based on.
Sure hope that everybody on sites like Motoringfile, Bimmerfile, and WhiteRoofRadio understand how much time is invested in sites like this and appreciate the dedication it takes to keep these sites going. I will be the first to say that I don’t always agree with Gabe,DB, Todd, and yourself on all your opinions yet I do like hearing views that are not clones of my own. I seriously believe that debate is a good thing.
Nuff said!
Guys, have spent a few reading through my comments and would just like to say that I think I have been more than a little forceful of my view. I am going to back off on commenting for a while since I think that my often repetitive comments have become more negative over time. I hope that with removing my negativity from the comments maybe we can get back to the constructive comments that has made Motoringfile an interesting read over the years.
Jon – dissent is not a weakness or a negative, in fact it is now being being encouraged by BMW Management as part of their 12 principles of change.
Michael, because things “will never change” doesn’t mean things can improve on the next version of the car. Also, I take issue with your views on what you consider to be “disrespect” if one has a dissenting opinion(s) on certain aspects of the current car. This is far from “living in the past” or the perceived lack of ability to embrace “change”. Simply, it is calling out certain traits of the current version that simply do not comply with the standards set by the first gen model and can be improved upon on the next. No one is calling out BMW to bring back the R53 or to discourage any sort of progress on the product.
Bashing, hatred, etc, etc are very different things. Constructive criticism and calling things by their rightful names are not. Remember that our obsession with “political correctness” is what has gotten this country into the mess it is today. No one wants to “hurt” the feelings of those who do not share the universally held views on anything.
For the record, I own a 2005 R53 S and a 2008 Clubman S and love both cars to bits. But I also can tell you negatives of each and don’t hesitate in calling them out on those weaknesses. Both great cars and I am glad to enjoy the best of both worlds.
Thanks for your efforts and time to respond to this thread.
Jon, you and I may not agree all the time, but please stick around. Your views and contributions are as valuable as anyone else’s.
Having a different opinion doesn’t make you a troll. Dissent is what makes great products and in the car industry the formula for survival is the ability for a manufacturer to make “Gotta have products”.
+1 What C4 just said. 🙂
I am all in favor of constructive banter, I myself participate in it regularly! My intention was nothing more than to get the banter and dialog dialed back in, it just seems every time I come here to check up on the news it ends up as what design was better commentary, it gets old.
Instead of talking about the past it seems more constructive to talk about the future and maybe how MINI/BMW could design things within the realm of the new CAFE standards and NCAP.
As far as BMW/MINI and the well documented growing in size (as is society), the reason was initially to add new models and on the BMW side it has been successful. The 3 became the 5 the 5 the 7 in size but the 1 was added, granted the US just was blessed with the 1. Additionally in the future BMW will have a model above the 7 and below the 1 so in reality the sizes have not changed overall but the model lineup has. It is so BMW/MINI can better reach economies of scale and remain independent. This Fiat thing may not even happen and may really only include the clubman. Information this far out is usually not that accurate. I forgot the exact number BUT there is a cap on the size of the MINI brand and BMW has stated it will not get any bigger, just as a simple measure it will not be within several inches of the current 1 hatch.
I hope that no one really leaves due to my comment, that was not the intention, I merely wanted to present some facts and a fairly objective view point as I do not contribute here but do read regularly.
Jon, your points have been well taken and you contributions here and elsewhere are noted. It is great that you can comment and voice your opinion, and keep myself and the others in “check”. I think it is very valuable as well so I hope to see you continuing on the commenting and that we can move forward!
I would also agree that my opinions are not always agreeable (maybe this is on purpose to gather some other opinions and comments) but it does make for some lively banter. All in all you readers, commenter makers and the Staff make this the best site for MINI on the net, and it truly is so keep it up!
And just so there is no question about me commenting; I made these posts without any outside influence and my original comment was placed in moderation as I am not affiliated with this site.
Michael, again appreciate your input. What makes MF a cut above all the rest is the ability for its members to have an open and healthy exchange of ideas. Please, let’s keep it that way.
On a side note:
I can not understand the Crossover for MINI on any level, it goes along with the new BMW mentality of building a vehicle for every niche under the sun and hoping it will help with economies of scale…. for all of you unfamiliar; BMW is building what they call a PAS basically a hatch coupe of the 5 series, additionally an X1, and a similar car to the PAS but smaller “V3”, need I mention the current X6?
C4:
I could not agree more!
C4. Bravo on your comment on “political correctness”. It’s fascism in drag.
>…from Leftlane — “In another bit of Mini news, McDowell revealed that a 50-state legal diesel-powered Mini is headed to the U.S., but failed to mention a timeframe for launch. We can only image the waiting lists for a 50+ mpg version of the sporty hatch.â€â€¦
>…is this blog-o-sphere crack-smoking or can anyone (read DB, Gabe, etc.) confirm this just yet???
Take a look at our story posted early Wednesday. As usual we have the inside info…
Press release from BMW AG on the memourandum of understanding between BMW AG and Fiat Group: <a href="http://www.press.bmwgroup.com/pressclub/us02.nsf/fwPressemeldungFrame?readform&docid=E16E90A8D34E8771C125748100659DE2" rel="nofollow">Memorandum of Understandig between BMW AG + Fiat Group</a>