Diesel Powered MINI Coming to the US Market
MF Exclusive: A MINI Diesel is Coming to the US Market but it’s not the Cooper D some might expect. Instead MINI has been working on a new model designed from the ground up with an engine that will comply with laws in all 50 states. You know it as the R60, the public will know is as the MINI crossover.
The diesel powered R60 could use a new BMW derived 4 cylinder engine and will feature an urea injection system similar to the one seen on BMWs. The R60 is expected to launch worldwide in late 2009 as a 2010 model in a range of petrol engines (including the new JCW 1.6L turbo) and we would expect the diesel to be at least six months behind that schedule.
OK, question for those who know a thing or 2 about Diesels… what are they “Real-World” differences between a particle filter system like the Dooper and the urea-injection system such as the R60 D will likely have?
This should make DB happy. On a side note, Gabe do you know when you will be reviewing the factory JCW?
On a particulate trap system, you have essentially a filter in the exhaust. A differential pressure sensor measures the flow across the filter and determines when it is clogged. When the flow is reduced to a pre-determined amount, raw fuel is dumped into the filter area and ignited. This effectively ‘burns’ the particulate and cleans the filter. It also creates VERY hot exhaust gas, and is fairly expensive.
I helped develop the differential pressure sensor that Volvo uses on thier particulate filtered diesels now, by the way.
The urea system is much simpler. There is a container of fluid that is ‘used up’ by the car. The fluid is constantly injected into the exhaust, and this fluid nuetralizes the emissions from the diesel. The biggest downside is that the urea, because it gets ‘used up’ has to be replaced periodically. So owners of cars with a urea system will have to buy urea cannisters when the system runs low. I’m also sure your friendly MINI dealer will replace it for you, for a hefty charge.
So, particulate trap – high initial cost, low maintenance cost.
Urea system – lower initial cost, higher maintenance cost.
^ good summary — I would add that urea systems also tend to be bulky (don’t know first hand about the particulate trap system but I would expect it to be more compact)
WOW! There’s always something going on in the MINI world isn’t there!? If something isn’t being launched, then something else is being announced! 🙂
I am very happy about this announcement. It has finally sink in the need to have diesels in the US MINI product mix.
Right engine. Wrong platform. Please bring this engine to the hardtop coupe.
I wish I could see this engine in the Coupe and Clubman. But the R60 D is better than nothing. It is a start….
I wonder what the life expectancy of a urea cannister might be – anyone know how long they last on the current BMW diesels and the cost to replace one?
BMW has them urea system tuned to last as long as an oil change, there is an active tank and a passive tank; the active being heated and what immediately feeds the system (think passive as bulk storage). In the BMW models for the US, the AdBlue (urea) will be replaced as part of the no cost maintenance; additionally the system has been designed so the consumer can buy the canister and very simply replenish the supply without the cost of a dealer maintenance visit.
The reason for the Clubman choice may simply be due to space for the extra tanks, the BMW X5 almost lost its third row seating with the diesel but the engineers found a spot elsewhere. In a MINI space is limited to begin with, so that would be my best guess. It is a shame this will not be ready until after my next car purchase…
Worth noting in the BMW there is NO option of a manual, though I would assume that would be different for the MINI.
more on the BMW system:
<a href="http://www.bimmerfile.com/2008/03/04/bmw-advanced-diesel/" rel="nofollow ugc">http://www.bimmerfile.com/2008/03/04/bmw-advanced-diesel/</a>
This car is such a big question mark. I’m really curious about it, especially in a diesel power plant. With the Cooper D getting such great mileage, I wonder if this crossover car will be able to do as well. We’ll see. I have yet to be catastrophically disappointed with MINI.
Easy, just wiz in the tank. Free urea!
Rocketboy: We’ll call the R60D the “Wizzer”.
Mixed feelings…
Yes, a Diesel is preferable in a 4×4 due to the low-end torque produced by these engines. Unfortunately, you can hardly call the R60 a 4×4 and I seriously doubt that anyone will be towing anything with these micro crossover/SAV/whatevers. So, a diesel isn’t really needed.
Diesel fuel, in case you haven’t noticed, is more expensive than super unleaded! That’s just what we need (another way to make the oil companies richer)!
I don’t claim to know much about diesels, but if there is another filter/cannister to replace periodically, then this too will add expense to operating.
And, finally, I am sure that this powerplant will come at a premium price over the petrol engines.
If you add all this up, it is hard to get excited about a diesel engine. This may seem like a step in the right direction, but I am not so sure. It is sort of like all the hybrids out there that many folks are trading their SUVs for. Manufacturers and dealers are charging a premium for these cars and the process of building them is contributing to the carbon footprint…
Wouldn’t we all be better off driving what we have in the long run (especially if it’s already paid for)??
<blockquote>“If you add all this up, it is hard to get excited about a diesel engine.”</blockquote>
Not for me. Although we’ll have to see how the car fares on mileage with all the extra weight and the increased drag in comparison to the MINI Cooper D, I’m pretty excited about it.
I imagine Jon will be torn… Diesel (plus) SUV (minus).
@ MINIme
Diesel is more costly, but for the advantage in mileage (diesel is more “potent” than gasoline), in direct comparison, it actually costs much less, as you are able to travel far longer on a gallon of diesel than you are on a gallon of gasoline.
Now whether other factors outweigh that cost advantage is to be seen, but I think regardless of what type of vehicle this will be, with the exception of the electric MINI’s coming, it will be the most efficient MINI in the line.
I’m too lazy to look right now, but IIRC DB did some math and figured that Diesel would have to cost around $7/gallon to offset the added mileage of the Dooper.
The easy way to think of Diesel efficiency…
Cooper S hwy mpgs: 34
Cooper D hwy mpgs: 68 (UK extra urban cycle converted to US gallons)
That’s a 1:2 ratio. Until the price of diesel at the pump is twice that of premium, the diesel car is putting money in your pocket.
And yes, it’s appropriate to compare the S to the D as they have similar torque values.
Diesel fuel is more expensive but you get more than your money’s worth with the superior MPG ratings over regular gasoline engines. Oh and it trunces the hybrids, hands down.
The hybrids are much cleaner than diesels. With Toyota coming out with a lithium ion battery next year, the Prius will hit the 70s in mpg.
Well, this debate has gone on forever and will continue I am sure, but the batteries in Hybrids will need to be disposed of eventually and making batteries is not exactly a “green” business either.
So, if you consider the lifecycle impact, Hybrids are not the panacea that some make them out to be.
^ but you can soon plug your MINI into a coal-firing power plant!
Diesel costs more than gasoline, thus negating any economic advantage.
The batteries used in current hybrids are fully recyclable and their lifespan should be comparable with the life of the car. People make it seems like these batteries are disposed of every few months.
The efficiency of a diesel engine goes only so far, however hybrid technology as of now has no limit. Developing new ways to better store energy and prevent discharge can send mpg over the roof. A hybrid, overall, is more environmentally sound than a diesel but I’m sure that’s not what people here care about.
Sorry, I am not sold on hybrid technology. I just don’t think it is a viable long term solution for fuel efficiency.
A hybrid is not necessarily more environmentally sound.
A hybrid that gets 50 mpg is less environmentally sound than a new diesel that gets 60 mpg.
Diesel costs about 10-15% more than premium petrol right now. So as long as the diesel gets at least 15% better mileage, the diesel wins in fuel costs.
Now, the cost of the vehicle in diesel vs. petrol trims and the cost of the urea replacement have to be figured in. This is similar to the higher cost of a hybrid vehicle over a standard petrol vehicle. In my personal case, I don’t drive enough to see a realistic payback from a hybrid. However, a diesel, at double the mileage, could be a couple thousand dollars more expensive initially and still pay back in a couple years.
Hai – the future of hybrid technology is very good, but if I’m shopping today for a car, a diesel would win out. three or four years from now that might be different.
For those whom believe the Hybrid is a great way to be environmentally friendly you have to drive the car 100,000 miles to offset the damage to the environment making the batteries causes. That is 100,000 miles to break even! Yes you don’t use as much gas and perhaps the batteries are recyclable but it doesn’t change the fact the making the battery is awful for our environment! Thus Hybrids as they stand currently are not the answer.
When I referred to being environmentally friendly, I did not just consider mpg, but also emissions. That is why in my opinion, I prefer a hybrid. Despite what EPA said about the Prius’ mpg, most people get around 55mpg. For city driving, you cannot beat a hybrid since you rarely use the gas engine while driving within city speed limits. Imagine getting stuck in stop and go traffic with A/C on and run solely on battery. City driving is where you get the most out of a hybrid. I live in an urban area and maybe that’s why I prefer the hybrid.
DubiouS, please elaborate.
What you’re saying is that the process of making one battery is equivalent to driving 100,000 miles?
You made a lot of assumptions without anything to back them up.
Here is a link to one of many articles on the negative aspects of a Hybrid car: <a href="http://www.newcarpark.com/blog/?p=68" rel="nofollow ugc">http://www.newcarpark.com/blog/?p=68</a>
The main problem is the amount of Carbon Dioxide that is output creating the battery. I’m also not saying Hybrid cars aren’t a good thing just that they aren’t as “green” as most people think they are.
I made no assumptions however I did assume you could use Google to look up the points I made. Living in the USA I should have been accustom to spoon feeding information so I apologize.
Oh and yes you have to drive your Hybrid 100,000 miles to “work off” the Carbon Dioxide produced making the batteries for the car.
Roccorocket: You might want to read the comments before posting to avoid posting something so completely wrong.
Also worth noting here is that the new diesels areas clean running than a hybrid if not better.
The new advanced diesels allow for minimum exhaust gas emissions and has been developed to meet the strict emissions standards in effect in California and other states. With its carbon emissions down 10% – 20% from comparable gasoline vehicles, and near-elimination of both smoke and NOx emissions, BMW Advanced Diesels will be every bit as clean as CARB-legal gasoline engines when they are introduced in the US in 2008.
I would imagine the MINI setup would be the same.
BOOOO U.S.A. Diesel-hater legislation! I want the Cooper D hatchback!
DubiouS, please post a better source than the laughable newparkcar.com. It offers no credibility and has no sources. Living in the modern world, I’ve learned that 90% of info on the internet is bullcrap.
“Oh and yes you have to drive your Hybrid 100,000 miles to “work off†the Carbon Dioxide produced making the batteries for the car.”
Repeat that to yourself a few more times, maybe you’ll actually believe it. LMAO
To make this complete:
AWD!!!
JCW!!!
oh, and of course,
AWD!!!! plus JCW
The next GP.
I wonder if (and yes I did read the article) this is going to be a BMW engine or a partnered engine, you know, economies of scale and all of that. I just find it hard to believe two very different Diesels for one small (Volume) platform. Kill the other one perhaps?
The news on this model and its potential derivatives just gets better and better. What’s next? Hovercraft capabilities?
Finally – diesel!! And in regards to diesel vs. hybrids, why has no one figured out that a diesel hybrid would wipe the road with the standard petrol hybrids we have now? I have heard of a concept car or two that has done this, but why hasn’t this been brought up by mainstream auto makers?
All of this being said, the most eco friendly thing to do now is to keep your current car anyway, so unless your car is on its last leg, you shouldn’t trade it in anyway.
Oh yeah, Prius = ugly
Want a diesel hybrid? UPS is driving a bunch of them around cities! The are really well liked by both the drivers who get really good torque at 0 RPM, and by all those working around loading docks and the like when the truck runs on electricity only, no fumes or idling.
And if you really want to get some efficiency, don’t hook the diesel to the drivetrain, just run it at max efficieny RPMs and use an electric drivetrain. Most of the arguements above can only be characterized as straw men arguements….
Matt
<p>I’ve waited for years for MINI to finally announce they’ll sell a diesel in the US, and this is what they come up with? A crossover?? I want a MINI, not a Subaru…</p>
<p>I dont care how it comes either Crossover or regular at least its a DIESEL!! Though personally want a CLUBMAN D but to start I might as well join the crowd my MCS 02 is clicking at 105K and getting anywhere in the city from 20 to 23 mpg city and 25 to 28 in highway, the DIESEL will help me on my commute to work or whenever I have to go out in the island on businnes’pleasure trips.I’ll wait til launch date and see what happen as i did for MCS 02, no regrets I love my car!!</p>