Analysis: MINI Crossover Concept
This one showed up on my radar last week. It’s a great analysis of the R60 Concept by frequent MF commenter Nathaniel Salzman. He took the time to reasearch and post a great analysis of not only the R60, but the MINI brand in general.
>I don’t think anybody who’s paying attention can say that a car with MINI’s premium outlook on features, safety, design, and economy, in a 4-door package, with AWD wouldn’t just sell like crazy in the US. It probably won’t be a big hit in Europe, but they’ll probably be lined up around the block to buy them here. This has led to accusations within the MINI enthusiast community that MINI is only making this car to pander to the poor tastes of American car buyers who’ve been brainwashed into this notion that they need off-road capability in their daily commute up the freeway. But is that what MINI is really delivering here? Yes, it’s based on the X1 platform, but that’s simply based off the 1-series BMW sedan. Given the alternatives and MINI’s very cheeky nature, doesn’t a micro-SUV simply make more sense than some sort of small sports sedan? There are tons of those on the market. MazdaSpeed 3, VW Jetta GLI, Honda Civic Si Sedan, Mitsubishi Lancer, and those are just the sporty ones. That’s a pretty crowded market space. But what SUVs of this size range even exist in the US market? The Rav4? The FJ Cruiser? Kind of, but you can’t claim any sort of sports car performance out of either of them. They’re also both still bigger than this MINI SAV will end up being.
Definitely worth reading…
[ MINI Reveals Crossover Concept ] Nathanielsalzman.com
Thanks Nathaniel for letting us share this with the MF readers!
Thanks for the nod, DB. It’s a cool concept and I’m really looking forward to the polished production version.
Thanks Nathaniel!
Excellent analysis. You just “open” my eye. I guess too that size is “relative”.
Nathaniel really happy to see your very well written article on Motoringfile, and I hope that you keep it up.
I certainly don’t agree with all parts of the article that you wrote, but is very concise and supportive about your view. I personally think listening and reading others views are a great thing whether you agree or not with the message. Reading or listening allows each of us to reflect our own views against those that are different. Personally for me this allows me to formulate new questions and see things from a different perception.
I’m still waiting for a Clubman size Mini with AWD and around 300hp for less than $30k.
I love the styling Mini exterior, like the interior, love the handling but the power and torque steer are my main issues with the car.
The only way I’ll get one is probably as a 3rd car for the family as both my wife and I love the styling.
This isn’t that different than the Clubman size wise, at least from the pictures. The diference being a fourth door and AWD.
They should have skipped the Clubman and just made this and called it Clubman. It certainly is a better looking vehicle.
Not my cup of tea and it doesn’t thrill me they’re diluting the brand. However, it’s history reveals that they attempted to do so many times in the past so they’re being consistant in the lineage.
I wonder if Mini owners in the 60’s got bent out of shape when Mini came out with the zany variants?
Greg, its very similar to the Clubman is length, the wheel base is a bit longer and the R60 is about 3″ longer overall. The height of course is a much different thing, this is going to be considerably taller than the current cars. However the biggest difference is in the width of the R60.
Think DB nailed one thing in WRR#271, I think this really needs some work to make it visually related to the current Mini’s. To my eye I can agree with what he said as whether I like this car or not it really doesn’t scream Mini to me. I agree with DB that this is a very important consideration for the success of this car.
Well said. Way to put some perspective on this new R60 model.
im so buying this!!! it will be perfect in cleveland weather. and a better family car down the road than my MCS. it looks very cool too. my favorite thing about it is that they decided to slope the back like the R56 and not chop it off like the clubman, i hate the rear of the clubman.
any speculation on cost on this bad boy?
A couple of concepts.
1. This is a Design Concept. It’s meant to try out new things. That’s why this thing seems bizarre at first glance. Yeah there’s a lot of stuff going on with the doors… each is a different concept.
2. This is also a potential Marketing Concept. It’s meant to pull in the SUV crowd, instead of push Mini owners into SUV’s. There are a lot of first time Mini owners who traded in their SUV’s. This vehicle would have broader appeal to those SUV owners who are on the fence.
I’m curious about cost as well. I’d be shocked if you could have one spec’d at nice at all for less than $30k. Not without giving up the roof, MFSW, and all the shiny chrome bits. Forget about sat nav! That’s the conundrum with MINI no matter which model you go with. The base cars are great, but if you really want one to be premium and nice, it’s going to cost you. Thankfully though, you get what you pay for. Besides that, it isn’t as though the other crossovers in the market are exactly bargain basement on price point.
I also wonder if there will be “S” or JCW versions in addition to the possible diesel. Perhaps there will be a limited edition version with a more aggressive AWD system. There really is a lot of room for variation and specialization on this platform. Could be some really cool things coming down the pike.
Well done and I hope you are getting paid for writing this and I look forward to reading more from you in future
<blockquote>Well done and I hope you are getting paid for writing this and I look forward to reading more from you in future</blockquote>
I’ve just been informed that Gabe and db are going to pay me twice what they paid me last time. Sweet!
<blockquote>It goes beyond the toaster appliance experience of most economy cars. Simply put, a MINI’s got soul. It’s also got guts. My car goes like stink and corners like it’s got saw blades for wheels. Yet still gets north of 30 mpg. Not too shabby.</blockquote>
LOVE this part. Great analysis, Nathan. I really enjoyed reading it 🙂
Great to see you here again, Nathaniel!
Welcome back (sort of), Nathaniel. Although I’ve bookmarked your site, I still hope you keep posting your comments here.
You definitely help class up the comment section of MF.
Based on what I’ve seen, read and heard about the R60, I have to say I’ve got quite a bit of faith in the MINI brand to pull through for us on this concept.
As a creative person, I have quite a bit of respect for the R60’s design and find its contemporary look quite attractive. As a MINI enthusiast, I can see how there are concerns about the design falling short when it comes to invoking the emotion that the other models so readily do.
In the end, I feel that only time will tell. But if MINI history has anything to teach us, it’s that we won’t be disappointed with the final production model. It won’t be for everybody, but may pull a few of the Ford and Chevy monsters off the road.
I second that dickdavid anything that can happen to remove the larger SUV’s from the road is a bonus. I am betting on the R60 coming in real close to 30k. Whats going to be interesting is to see the X1 at the Paris show to and to compare the two together since they share a common platform. I still believe that the price point between the R60 and the X1 is going to be tight enough to make people jump back and forth as to the better value.
I also have no problem with the size. It will be tiny for a crossover.
Why do they follow Toyota and have borderline dangerous over the shoulder visibility?
I disagree with the authors contention that this makes more sense than another sports car. In the USA, there are no small FWD 2 seater roadsters.
A MINI without the mostly worthless back seat, with visibility the MINI convertible lacks, would be very welcome, especially with a folding hardtop option.
It would be like having a Mazda Miata that you could drive in the winter.
I’m wondering if the size will put this car into a class that can compete in rallies head to head with subaru and mitsu. Re-entering this area of motorsport would be a very cool benefit of this size/configuration model for Mini.
Nathaniel – great piece there. You know, in the end if Mini did not have the mindset to make this cross, then they probably would not have had the mindset to reinvent the Mini in the first place, and we wouldn’t all be here talking about it.
If you follow the World Rally Championship you will know that Citroen, Ford Focus, Subaru, etc will leave the Crossover for dead. Don’t go there. Dine out on the 1964, 65, 66, 67 Monte Carlo results forever.
<blockquote>Given the alternatives and MINI’s very cheeky nature, doesn’t a micro-SUV simply make more sense than some sort of small sports sedan?</blockquote>
Yes, but who ever thought Mini would consider making a small sports sedan? Oh, I guess you did. No offense, but I would not describe you as an automotive marketing visionary. Sedan and MINI just don’t mix.
The SAV/SUV/Soft-Off-roader thing is way over done and circling the drain. A “micro-SUV” makes much less sense than a subcompact AWD performace hatchback. There is nothing on the market there, unless you count the R32, but it is relatively large and bloated. Provide a cheaper, smaller, lighter, better-handling and cooler-designed alternative to the R32, A3, WRX and Evo… now you are talking real market opportunity.
If it only that it would look like this when it comes out.
I read your analysis with great interest, and it helped me solidify my thoughts about what I liked and disliked about the R60. From a functional perspective I am looking forward to this model and plan to buy one, but I hope they make some stylistic changes from the concept:
1) Change the front headlights to make the front end look more like a MINI product.
2) Change the ‘tailgate’ to look less like a Chrysler product. Maybe make it an actual tailgate so those of us who want to camp in our car have a platform long enough for a sleeping surface.
3) Change those FJ1-looking rear corners. It looks good on the car, but it’s such a blatant copy of the FJ1 that it’s a little embarrassing. Surely they can come up with something more original that looks as good.
<blockquote>If you follow the World Rally Championship you will know that Citroen, Ford Focus, Subaru, etc will leave the Crossover for dead. Don’t go there. Dine out on the 1964, 65, 66, 67 Monte Carlo results forever.</blockquote>
Now that’s just the kind of smack talk to get JCW riled up!
Great article but whoever designed that grill should be dumped alive into a tank of hungry sharks!
<blockquote>Now that’s just the kind of smack talk to get JCW riled up!</blockquote>
Sometimes the truth just hurts….
Matt
>If you follow the World Rally Championship you will know that Citroen, Ford Focus, Subaru, etc will leave the Crossover for dead. Don’t go there. Dine out on the 1964, 65, 66, 67 Monte Carlo results forever.
And BMW doesn’t have the money to spend. They bankroll an F1 team plus tons of other smaller racing programs around the world. MINI racing these days will be strictly limited to the Challange program they already have going.
A very large number of people are morbidly afraid of change. Especially if the change is to something that evokes a strong emotional response. Fortunately, it appears there are a few people at MINI who understand that change is necessary for survival and growth in the highly competitive automotive industry.
So tired of seeing America denigrated for being a huge country. People here gravitate to cars that offer more space and more versatility, which SUV’s have in spades. It’s not a lack of character to want this.
In fact, it’s “smart” Americans who are interested in a smaller SAV/SUV like the MINI Crossover. Not poor taste. What elitist trash.
America is a wide-wide-wide open country. If we lived in Europe, the masses would be buying compact hatchbacks. It’s a geographic issue.
And I don’t own an SUV. I am a small-car person. But I don’t like to see people maligned for buying what their needs dictate.
Doug, well stated, though I don’t agree with everything you said.
I personally try not to malign people buying things they need. The fact is a large number of these will be sold in Florida and California were the need of AWD is a joke. Also I would point out the buying behavior of Americans generally really match their needs when it comes to cars. Take for example how many 4×4 full sized trucks that have pristine paint from never going offroad and beds that have never seen work. How many Escalades are sold to families that need that many seats? Drive though any town and count the numbers of non-work trucks and single occupancy monster SUV’s.
I am sure many of the R60’s will be sold to people that need this type of car. Though I am betting most will be sold to people that don’t. Can’t remember how many times in my Mini Dealership I have heard people say, if it was just bigger. This is usually not about fitting more people or more cargo as much as the Mini is still a small car.
Well put JonPD. I do agree there should be way-high taxes on these childless Escalade drivers. I am all for hitting these pavement princes in the wallet, to dissuade them from buying rigs that are for status only.
I just know from my own personal experience that buying for the future, getting it bigger than I currently need it, is a consideration when buying something as expensive as a car. Especially if you plan to own your car 7+ years, which is most responsible for the materials going into making it, and the cost benefits to your family in driving it into the ground, so to speak.
So, I guess I’m more in agreement than I thought with the criticisms, but we don’t always know why someone buys what they buy. AWD could be for a ski trip twice a year at Big Bear, is that wrong? Not sure.
My Mini has been to more than one ski slope over the years, AWD is nice but FWD is a very capable car on the slick roads.
<blockquote>Yes, but who ever thought Mini would consider making a small sports sedan? Oh, I guess you did. No offense, but I would not describe you as an automotive marketing visionary. Sedan and MINI just don’t mix.</blockquote>
“No offense” but how about you don’t describe me at all. It’s this kind of “you’re wrong and therefore you suck” assholery that keeps me and others from wanting to participate here. Congratulations, you’ve been an excellent example.
Disagree with my ideas all you like, but leave me the #$%@ out of it.
Nathaniel don’t let it get to you. As I stated before I have agreed and disagreed with you plenty of times on Motoringfile, but you are at least able to present your views in a logical way. I think what is part that keeps the community strong is some debate between the brand owners. Hopefully we can keep from attacking the person and focus our debate on things that are important to our brand.
JohnPD, thinking more about what you said… one addendum.
It’s not as easy to get an AWD vehicle in Los Angeles as it is in Colorado. Don’t overestimate the number of AWD vehicles flying off the lots in warm-weather climates.
Sure, the reason is monetary, not global concern. People won’t pay the premium for AWD if they don’t need it. Ditto heated seats.
In my mind, this is just another example of needs dictating what people buy.
Yes, there will always be the single guy rolling by in his Escalade with his elbow out the window. There will always be a billion V8 trucks sold in Texas (though that’s changing too, ask Toyota). But I am prepared to look foolish sticking up for average people for buying the car they need–bigger than those of us here would buy, certainly–but because they’re concerned about usability/versatility for their 7-year purchase.
I guess my point is, instead of enlightened folks ripping the average joe for buying a car he wouldn’t buy, let’s ask ourselves–after XX of years since the invention of the internal combustion engine, where are the alternative fuel sources, or motors, that the average joe can buy to help reduce fuel consumption and help promote a more healthy planet?
That’s the issue. They’re not out. They don’t exist. So, family Joe buys a FWD Tahoe for his family and drives to work in it. Personally, I’m a little more inclined to criticize the auto industry and the government for allowing MPG to stagnate for years since the 70’s… and for laziness in innovation.
And, bringing it back around to this MINI crossover, I’m glad to see MINI doing something with found technology and making cars as small and efficient as possible, but still versatile with the Clubman footprint. 😉
I hear what your saying Doug, still I would bet that +80% of all AWD sales nation wide are for people that buy AWD thinking its safer. This is a lark, this is the same methodology that gave us monster sized SUV’s. The US has been force fed that bigger is safer. A vehicle can have safety devices but a huge percentage of safety while driving a car is the driver behind the wheel. My general issue with AWD’s is the overconfidence that there drivers feel. Any car though if driven poorly is a hazard.
I will never bash a person for buying a large vehicle if they have honest needs. As case and point my neighbor who drives a F-150 super-duty and his wife who drives a Pacifica. Both are large cars but as he is a construction worker and needs to haul loads and they have a family of 6 when they bought both vehicles I had zero issues with their choice. On the other hand another neighbor has one of the old monster Suburban that is a 4×4, that he drives to his insurance office alone each day.
I second your unhappiness about the Federal Government and bing so slow to increase mileage. However I still think this issue is mis-guided. I hear the Democratic party say we need to raise our fuel standards. This however is pointed largely at small vehicles. The real issue is that there is so little control of truck based vehicles. Take as a case and point California which says the Mini D is bad for the environment meanwhile per capita is has one of the largest numbers of SUV’s that have very little done about their incredibly low mileage and outright danger on the streets
Great piece of analysis and writing, Nathaniel. Thanks for your perspective.
I’m looking forward to seeing the photos and description of the concept at Paris, and am keeping an open mind (I hope) about it…mostly because by the time it launches, I will be in the market for a car that can seat 4 comfortably and it would be great to be able to stick with the brand.
<blockquote>“The real issue is that there is so little control of truck based vehicles.”</blockquote>
Absolutely. And I’d go so far as to say, force drivers of these big consumer vehicles to get a special driver’s license, proving a 5’11” Mom (or Dad) piloting a Suburban can drive it safely.
And I agree, these truck/SUV’s have gotten a pass on MPG because they’ve been primarily hawked by the (not so big anymore) Big-3, so government officials look the other way.
And for anyone wondering, why are they going on about non-MINI cars… it’s relevant… because the MINI fanbase has to consider MINI’s going “bigger” in the context of these monster cars on the road. MINI is offering a conscientious driver the option of going <em> slightly</em> bigger than a hardtop MINI, all things considered.
MINI is doing the right thing here, and leading the way as usual.
So what if this SAV is made for the American market? That’s good for American drivers, who can get a lot of the same functionality from a smaller vehicle, saving gas, making the roads safer, and having fun doing it.
Current MINI drivers can think of this as a way to get rig-drivers into the motoring mentality. If this is the MINI that turns their head, great… wave, let ’em into traffic. That is, if MINI truly is about saving the planet in style, and not just a club where strict ideas of “smallness” dictate who is in and who is out. (I don’t think people on here are saying that, just making the point.)
Yep you are correct Doug on why the only discussion in our politics are towards cars. The base fact is politicians have no spine to address the biggest gas wasters on the street, large SUVs.
Heck, the most environmentally conservative state out there California has a Governor that drives a hummer frequently. Go to any state capital and see what your representatives tend to drive and you will see a fleet of SUV’s. This a a good part why I think that little more than lip service has ever been applied to this issue.
I also agree that small crossovers have their place, then again its not like Mini is making this because there is a dramatic need of small crossovers. They for better or worse looked and saw the large sums of money to be made with small crossover. I still have to say I don’t believe every brand needs a SUV in its rank. This hands down is the single most uncreative and unimaginative move BMW/Mini could have made. The issue is if tomorrow monster SUV’s become all the rage again, with Dr Segler’s statement in the interview with Gabe they could make a full sized SUV as long as it smaller than the others.