[nggallery id=5]
In today’s look at the book MINI Design Past Present Future, we look at the early stages of the R56.
It’s interesting to see how MINI design was trying to deal with the coming pedestrian regulations dictating taller hood and more space between the hood and the engine. Also obviously in the sketches, designers were trying to find the right balance between that friendly MINI face and the aggressive nature of current automotive design.
Remember that if you’re interested in an English version of this book, MINI may consider producing an english edition if the feedback on MotoringFile is positive and strong enough. So if you’d be interested in the ultimate coffee table book about MINI design, let us know in the comments section.
<p>The more I see of that book, the more impressed I am.</p>
<p>im sure that theres enough demand for an english version by now 🙂 hurry and publish it MINI!</p>
<p>I’m seeing a 500 in my future if what is shown comes true. Can’t they just give Europeans a flack jacket or have them take a how to cross a street class… ;-)</p>
<p>The book would be cool for sure.</p>
<p>Something like this screams out for a DVD with page-by-page commentary. A lofty dream, of course, but to have MINI Design Team commenting on the images would amazing.</p>
<p>I like those sketches of the hood variations – particularly the one with the single asymmetrical air inlet. Would look very nice with off center stripes!</p>
<p>Ironic that the production R56 ended up looking much LESS aggressive – shapely R53 pontoon curves in the hood that suggest strength and location of the mechanicals underneath it (ditto for R50 which had no SC and intercooler so hood form could follow function and be much lower between the headlight pontoons) led to a puffy featureless hood. Headlights themselves grew large (fishbowled) and somewhat walleyed as they were stretched too close to the fender rather than the forward-focused “piercing gaze” that the R53 managed. The overall effect, amplified by the increased ride height in the wheelwells, was more large VW New Beetle than small trim sporting hatch. But this has been discussed again and again and I am hoping the facelift gets the R56 to where it needs to be to finally make a well-resolved unified visual statement on its own merits.</p>
<p>The book is a keeper for sure for all of us MINI owners that value good design – bring it in English! :)</p>
<p>English? Yes, please!</p>
<p>Heck, I’d probably buy the book eventually just for the pictures if I had to, but since my German isn’t all that great anymore, English text would make it a must-have.</p>
<p>The more I see of this book the more I would like to own one but I do not speak or read German. Sign me up if an English printed version becomes available. Thanks for sharing with us even if we can’t read German.</p>
<p>I agree with all the comments, bring it over now!</p>
<p>If they produced this book, I’d have 2! One for me and another for someone to give to me as a gift!</p>
<p>Less aggressive? I don’t see that – I’ve always preferred the R56 because it’s much more aggressive looking than either the R50 or 53. Different realities, no doubt.</p>
<p>lava – It is true that aesthetic perceptions/realities differ wildly but here is mine:
“Puffy” features are not typically associated with “aggression” (blowfish are a comical exception, though again that is a purely defensive posture rather than an aggressive one!), and raised ride height and wheelgap on a sporting car is also antithetical to aggressive design. In a nutshell, the car became less hunkered down and generally rounder with less visual relief of its major surface panels. About the only item that definitely grew MORE “aggressive” is the larger fender flares – except they didn’t because they are at a much flatter angle to the sheetmetal in frontal/rear view and only accentuated the wheelgap in profile view… so again, less aggressive in execution. Don’t get me wrong… the aero kit on the R56 + a healthy suspension drop does wonders… i am looking forward to the refresh and especially The Twins and so remain ever hopeful! :)</p>
<p>Puffy is subjective, because its always looks stronger and more muscular to me. The R50 looks petit which is appropriate, and the R53 much the same but for the frankenstein forehead caused by fitting the SC in there. Yes, there is more space in the wheel well, but thats because the R56 has more suspension travel – it has to go somewhere, because the overall height did not change, nor the ground clearance. You are wrong if you think the ride height is taller. The top of the fender is taller to go with the taller hoodline, and so the proportion of all things – wheel arches included are wider, taller, and to me bigger and more muscular. But one persons muscular is another’s “puffy” Like a “puffy” hulk… I can see that.. not.</p>
<p>I don’t think the refresh will bring change to any of the issues you mention – puffy or otherwise. But I do look forward to it the same, and the next Mini beyond which I have a feeling I’ll like even more.</p>
<p>Hi lava – to be clear, nowhere have I implied that the vehicle’s roof height of R56 is > R53/r50. It is the wheelwell gap that drives me (and many others) nuts about the current cars (all of them, including JCW cars fitted with JCW suspension). Some of this wheel gap is real and measurable and some of it is visual exaggeration brought about by the oversized flat fender trim (this also makes 17″ wheels look barely adequate in the R56 and 16″ downright ridiculous a too bad because our cars do drive better with smaller lighter wheels). And, for the record, wheelwell gap <> suspension travel. You can have big wheel gap and still have minimal suspension travel. Suspension travel is exactly as named – the movement suspension components have to move vertically before there is no further movement possible and the suspension fully compresses the shock against the stiff rubber bump stops. To get more suspension travel by jacking up a production car on taller springs, especially a sports hatch, is the laziest suspension redesign effort that ever could be and I do not think that was the motivation behind the 4X4 height anyway.</p>
<p>Anyway, agree that your “aggressive” is my “puffy”. :). What I will predict, however, is that – assuming we actually see a significant midlife refresh in a few weeks – many many reviews will finally stop mincing words when they comment on the aesthetic design execution of the 2007-2009 R56 exterior and interior. Interesting to see the models evolving either way.</p>
<p>I don’t think you are fairly characterizing the change in the suspension from the R50 gen to R56 gen. It certainly was not just jacked up on higher springs – the height of the car, the ride height has remained the same, so obviously it has not been “jacked-up” or it would be taller with a higher ride clearance. What has happened is the suspension members now have longer travel, which dictates a larger wheel well, and perhaps a greater gap when in a neutral position. The higher wheel well play will into the higher sill height and the overall change in proportion. It all works, and calling it 4×4 height is just ridiculous. This is the kind of reactionary comments that were thrown around after the car was introduced and I really can’t believe we are seeing it again. Its just not a credible criticism. You may really believe that we will suddenly have strong design crits if the refresh does not affect these things – well that goes with the 4×4 comment and really is not grounded in reality. The refresh will not change proportions, and I’ll be very surprised if we hear anything but the same old stale crits from the same people that complained the first time around.</p>
<p>Lava you and I are not going to see eye to eye on this or many other R56 aesthetic issues. I do enjoy the dialogue but time to move on especially since this is now a page2 article. I suspect over coffee it would be a more enjoyable discussion anyway… Have a good Friday man! :)</p>
<p>Looking at these images again, I can see some of the front end of the Countryman in some of these sketches – specifically the second image, the largest sketch of the front end of a mini hatchback</p>