BMW Outlines MINI’s Future Product Guidelines
BMW Design Chief Adrian van Hooydonk chatted with the UK automotive magazine Autocar recently about the MINI brand and recent MINI design strategy. The strategy was created as a series of guidelines for the future of the brand and its products. The key take aways? MINI will stay premium, handle well, use clever engineering and stay design focused. Here’s an excerpt:
>The original Mini’s handling prowess on the road and in competition will influence Mini’s future direction. Its fashion heritage will play its part too, van Hooydonk said.
>”That combination of clever engineering, serious handling and fashion was very strong, and will live through in future Minis,” he said.
>”Because Mini is on the threshold of turning into a proper brand, we will be looking at a pallet of models for the future,” he added.
Mini will not rush into it, van Hooydonk believes, and the shared front-wheel drive architecture being developed with BMW will reduce some of the immediate pressure on Mini to increase its sales volumes.
But what about the forthcoming front wheel drive BMW and the next generation MINI being too similar? Van Hooydonk responded that both design teams had already created proportional models to prove both products can be visually distinct. On the performance side BMW firmly believes that they can create decidedly different driving experiences thought chassis electronics (among other things) that allow them to manipulate handling characteristics.
For more information on MINI’s next generation platform, check out our 3rd Generation MINI section.
+ Mini to launch “new chapter” / Autocar
<p>MINI should have stopped at the R53. All the post-R53 models are weaker in all respects. Thanks BMW for diluting a thoroughbred and turning it into a mutt</p>
<p>really, R53 people get over yourselves. if you are SO happy with them, why oh why are tones of them in used car lots… Mini is improving each time.</p>
<p>I don’t have the searing distaste for the current and future MINI models the OP does, but I too believe they should have stopped at the R50/52/53. I think it was about perfect in every way and could have been built for at leasst 10 years and sold really well once people started seeing them on the road more often. That along with the dealer network expansion would have been great for MINI sales. They may sell more cars now than they would have keeping the R50/52/53, but after all the tooling and design was paid for, the last 5 years of production would have been practically pure profit.</p>
<p>Does anybody know the typical lifespan of a one trick pony? That is what MINI would have become if they didn’t keep moving forward with design ideas. Most of the original Mini crowd thinks the brand was ruined with the introduction of the new MINI in 2001. I can’t wait to see what they come up with next.</p>
<p>I realize that we have people out there that are lovers of the R50/52/53 and think that Mini should never have advanced to the R56. But they did, for several reasons, and one was to get out from under that engine for economical reasons. And, I also remember how the Classic Mini purists screamed their heads off about how the 1st generation Mini’s weren’t really Mini Coopers at all. Now we have the 1st generation guys saying that there’s nothing in the R56 that is good. No engine, no suspension, ugly dash, cheap materials, wrong headlights and hood. I could go on, but you get the picture.</p>
<p>Let’s face it, there are problems with the R56, just like there were problems with the R50 series. No car is perfect, but Mini/BMW is trying to help the problems along. Case in point, cheap plastic. That’s being changed this year. Also, I’ve ridden, ONCE in a R52 and it rode like a buckboard. The handling wasn’t bad, but my friends JCW 2009 version, out handles it and is much smoother thru out the range. Anyway, I just thought that I’d add my little imput.</p>
<p>There are some people who believe that BMW should not have quit making the 2002. There are others who believe that a Porsche should only have a flat-6 mounted behind the rear axle. The same concept from Formula 1 applies here: “If you are standing still, you are losing ground…”.</p>
<p>That’s like saying Porsche wasn’t a proper brand until they introduced the Cayenne and Panamera. Even through, now the sales of those two models does keep Porsche in the supercar business.</p>
<blockquote>Even through, now the sales of those two models does keep Porsche in the CAR business.</blockquote>
<p>ding ding ding!</p>
<p>Really, I’m surprised that no one cought onto the phrase about keeping the driving dynamics different through electronics programming and that like. Who gets the “drivers” car? If BMW is the “ultimate driving machine” then I worry about wooden steering, poorly programmed DSC systems and the like as a way to get driving dynamics distinctions between shared platforms with different bodies.</p>
<p>Oh wait, MINI ALREADY gets poorly programmed electric steering and DSC systems….</p>
<p>This will be interesting as it unfolds. Most car companies of BMW size can’t afford to differentiate for shared platforms with different engines, so what’s left? The body, seating position, options packages and e-systems programming.</p>
<p>There is some hope though, if BMW wants to keep a price premium over MINI, maybe they can do lighter decontented cars for MINI and overweight, option laden packaging for BMW to keep a price difference. At least one of the cars may stay true to it’s heritage… ;)</p>
<p>Matt</p>
<p>I agree with Matt. I saw that line too. BMW is going to manage how the MINI handles via electronics programming, as opposed to clever mechanical engineering. That does bother me a bit. However, I think I will judge each model of car on its merits and not strictly on comparing previous generations with the current. There are some things in the R56 that are absolutely better than an R50’s. Also, evolving regulations from country to country has dictated a lot of the MINI’s design so I can’t really fault MINI for some of the design issues many of us have.</p>
<p>I do look forward to testdriving the next generation and various models of MINIs.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>I agree with Matt. I saw that line too. BMW is going to manage how the MINI handles via electronics programming, as opposed to clever mechanical engineering.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Everything that makes the MINI great in regards to handling will still be there in the 3rd Gen. The problem is it’ll be in the new BMW as well. The problem BMW has is to differentiate the BMW model from the MINI. Both will handle well. However the MINI will likely have a quicker rack and feel more nimble where the BMW will have more solidity.</p>
<p>“On the performance side BMW firmly believes that they can create decidedly different driving experiences thought chassis electronics (among other things) that allow them to manipulate handling characteristics.”</p>
<p>In other words, heavier, duller and computerized models.
Not the driver’s car anymore.</p>
<p>Or as BMW prefer to say it; “more mature and sophisticated.”</p>
<p>Give me a small lightweight FWD MINI with a supercharged bulletproof strong engine, but without comfortable/unnecessary electronic devices.
If you’d like something comfortable loaded with safety devices that fits a family, then buy something else.</p>
<p>Dude, just make me a turbo Cosworth rally-spec Cooper with an aluminum and carbon body and I’ll die a happy man…and I’ll beat Porsche and the factory Mini at Road Atlanta, and then Ken Bloack and Subaru after that!</p>
<p>I think you should change “comments” to “complaints” here at MF.</p>
<p>I see mostly good in this article… The DNA of the MINI has been correctly identified (at least partially) and we are told will be respected. It takes very little to differentiate / sharpen a car… Anyone who has modded their car knows even a bespoke alignment can change a car to foreground handling feel. Electronics are now yet another tool in the kit. And no need to assume that one car (mini) will handle horribly and the other (BMW) will handle great.</p>
<p>I do agree with matt, mind, that bmw’s track record on this front is poor… R53 has terribly intrusive TC and DSC compared to its contemporary e46. R56 improved this but still not up to programming in e90. And even the softest least direct all electric non-sport pack Xdrive e90 has more steering weight and feel than the r56 with sport button disengaged so BMW needs to prove they can get mini electronics programmer appropriately in gen3.</p>
<p>Even though I do think they shoudl ahve stopped at the 53 I’m also interested to see what they come up with. What would tht MINI, or any other have become without the next model year pushing it forward.</p>