BMW Marketing has a mole. Or at least it would appear that way as yet another marketing photo-shoot as been infiltrated by a spy photographer. This time it’s the F56’s turn to be (almost) completely exposed in a rather unflattering way. The shoot had three cars (two Cooper S’s and one Cooper) and is for initial marketing material to be launched this fall.
Autoblog is the first site to pony-up for the photos but look for them elsewhere on the web eventually. While we won’t take the photos and post them out of respect for the photographer and Autoblog we do ask that you come back here to join the MINI-centric discussion at MotoringFile. Check out all 27 photos in hi-res at Autoblog.
Before we dive into the photos, there’s one important thing to keep in mind here. These are taken using extremely long zoom lenses, so the views we’re seeing here are going to have a lot of telescopic compression, in addition to being from a strange, high angle. So don’t take the exact shape of anything too seriously.
A couple of key things worth pointing out straight away. We’re finally seeing the full extent of the Rocketman Concept’s influence on the F56. As previously reported here on MotoringFile, the LED “halo” headlight surrounds will serve as fulltime running lights on the F56. Also Rocketman bred, the front grille is finally exposed in all its open-mouthed glory. The rear end is finally coming into focus as well.
The tail lights have grown, as we’d seen in the previous spy shots, but now we’re seeing the full trim. Gone are the “island” tail lights seen on the previous two generations of MINIs. The side scuttles, on the other hand, appear to have returned to their R50/R53 island configuration. As with the R56, the headlights pass through the still clamshell bonnet.
I could spend the rest of the day describing the car, but let’s talk about what you are seeing. Head over to Autoblog, then come back and sound off in the comments.
<p>OMG?! wtf is this?</p>
<p>front is awful like nissan micra mixed with frog… rear is a toy look…</p>
<p>the only good points are for rear roof spoiler and interesting led front lights… the rest – hugely disappointing</p>
<p>I stay with my 2011 JCW</p>
<p>I completely agree. Will reserve final judgment until I see it in person but I really prefer my 2012 JCW (and the 1st gen too) over this new version.</p>
<p>No worry Guys… Just wait till you see one in person. I saw one completely undisguised at a MINI consumer clinic (i.e Focus Group) and it is rather quite attractive in a progressive way, compared to R## generations.</p>
<p>Completely agree. From everything I know, have seen and have heard this will be an immediately attractive car in person and more resolved than any MINI before it.</p>
<p>REALLY…?</p>
<p>those were the two things I liked from seeing this.</p>
<p>You said it. I posted one comment here. I can’t get over what a botched up plastic surgery the face of this car got. What’s with that tacked on brake air duct cooler? It’s sticking way out there like some sort of ant eater nose. Whale shark mouth. Tail lights out of proportion with the car. Hyundai and Mazda had that god awful looking black bar on the nose. I swear the AMC Gremlin and Pacer were more photogenic. If this is the final version, it will go down as a top 3 all tom ugo. I ditched my 2008 after all the engine problems it had. Won’t be going back. VW GTI for 2015… Now there’s a nice ride….</p>
<p>Those tail lights are huge! Nearly removing the lower front grille and bumper makes it really look like a face now. A face with giant eyes and a tiny fish mouth gasping for air. LOL. Definitely not used to this yet at all.</p>
<p>I like the looks of the front and side. The new headlights and hood look good. Nice to see a more angled windshield. The rear with the larger than life taillights will take some getting used to. The new orange is an interesting color. Can’t wait to see clear shots of all of the new interiors.</p>
<p>Is that the Volcanic Orange? Is it Yellow? Is it orange? Not sure, but I think I like it.</p>
<p>In a comment on a post last week, when that color was visible on the mirrors, Gabe claimed it was the new orange (which has previously been identified at Volcanic Orange). In some of these, shots, it looks quite yellow, but then, if you don’t white balance properly, oranges can go VERY screwy in photos. I could show you Spice Orange shots you’d swear were Chili Red…</p>
<p>Let’s hope it drives better than it looks.</p>
<p>That front bumper needs color coding badly..</p>
<p>Yes, I think that would help quite a bit.</p>
<p>In the shot of the yellow S (?) with the hood open, the engine looks very small. Is that the 3-cyl turbo?</p>
<p>I like the hood and front quarter panel. I almost like the side. As for the rear and front, well, I’ve been meaning to get back into Corvettes anyway. lol Even in black this is a look only a German mother could love. They’re going to have to stuff 400hp in the JCW for people to take another look at it. I’m sure people are going to say that everyone always hates the new model….but this is seriously gross.</p>
<p>It’s in need of a license plate to break up the horrible black plastic in the grille. An inelegant solution trying to bring back the past and bring up Rocketman design cues. It reminds me of the current Mazda 3 front…</p>
<p>The front proportions are hard to interpret given the lens angles. The overall proportions and rear shoulders are nice. The taillights are quite generous in size. They really need Frank Stephenson to consult on MINI design…</p>
<p>I’m really hoping it’s better in person AND drives very well…</p>
<p>Your comment about the black front end needing a plate to break up all that black plastic made me realize where I’ve seen this before, it’s the Audi front end with that massive grill and black bar across the middle.</p>
<p>Yeah, but the Audi has some ridges to make it fit in better and there’s no body color above and below, so it doesn’t stand out like this.</p>
<p>What’s with the front overhang?! Looks huge on these photos… The rear will eventually grow on me – the front kinda looks like a scared smiley…</p>
<p>Ever more stringent european pedestrian impact standards are to blame there. There has to be a certain amount of space between the sheet metal and the harder engine parts underneath so that if you hit a pedestrian, they will sustain fewer injuries. It’s causing most cars sold in europe to have noses that look the same. Look at a lot of the current Ford lineup that also sells in Europe. Similar stuff.</p>
<p>But the Fords have an open mouth, not a silly bumper clogging up what used to be a nice open mouth on the S models. Why was that needed. Also, how do pointed cars like Lambos get sold in Europe?</p>
<p>Lambo’s are rear engined so different standards. Look at the difference between a front engined Ferrari, like the California (ugly) and the 458 (beautiful). The front has a negative knock-on effect on the rest of the car.</p>
<p>The F56 is a shocker. The blame goes partly to EU standards, part BMW design team.</p>
<p>Correction – Lambo’s are mid engined.</p>
<p>Well that is just silly; it will still chop your legs if it hits you. Okay, are they not planning on selling Corvettes in Europe? Front engine, pointy nose.</p>
<p>It would be good to take Salzman’s caveat to heart: ‘taken with a long telephoto at a high angle.’ This is nothing like seeing the F56 at eye-level with normal perspective. It’s like taking a portrait of my bald head. Even NSA would have trouble with that.</p>
<p>Exactly. No need for peepe to jump into conclusion. Cars don’t stay in photos in computer screen. They exist in the real world as a 3D form! In real life, people will be impressed…</p>
<p>So, why don’t we say the same thing about spy photos of other cars that are almost unanimously appealing regardless of distance or lens type (like a Ferrari, for instance)? There’s only so much one can blame on a lens.</p>
<p>There is nothing surprising or exciting looking here.
And that’s all I am going to say about it. Disappointed but not surprised.</p>
<p>They moved the gas tank to the other side??</p>
<p>Yes. Has to do with platform sharing with BMW.</p>
<p>Thanks Nathaniel – perhaps I’ve missed it that in a previous MF article. Would be super-annoying to have to walk around to the other side when filling up.</p>
<p>I don’t like to judge MINIs from their prototypes because I’ve purchased two that I absolutely disliked from spy photos (Clubman and Coupe). But I feel releasing these photos now will just help the rest of the R56 sales……. Time will tell but also will reserve final comment until I see one in the flesh – err… steel ;)</p>
<p><blockquote>Would be super-annoying to have to walk around to the other side when filling up.</blockquote></p>
<p>We’ve had it easy. Now it’s time for MINI drivers in the UK to get their turn.</p>
<p>Yes. We’ve reported for years it was coming. It’s more inline with the needs of right hand drive markets.</p>
<p>Yet another example of the departure from “Not Normal” and the arrival of “Just like everybody else”. I understand the rationale, just sayin’.</p>
<p>Even if we pretend for a moment that what side the fill cap is on is really an important issue, in what way does having is having it on the driver’s side “Not Normal?” Every car I’ve ever owned, and the overwhelming majority of those I’ve driven, have had driver’s side gas access.</p>
<p>Agree, it is a minor item. Just responding to Gabe’s post that it was done to be “in line” with sales markets. Understandable and predictable, instead of Not Normal. More likely is that it was done due to platform sharing with BMW.</p>
<p>I won’t be bashing the F56, and will probably will own one soon enough. Just lamenting the continued loss of quirky character, flaws and all, which give the MINI added charm.</p>
<p>Disappointed in the new look. Mostly with the nose/lights. But maybe the big bumper look is coming back in style and MINI is leading the way?</p>
<p>I am surprised about the 5-lug wheels. Even more parts sharing with the next 1-series I guess. Have to wait longer for “official” interior shots. Then just need a side by side with the next 1er.</p>
<p>5 lug wheels will be a good thing. If it shares a BMW size combo minis will immediately be able to take advantage of many more aftermarket wheel options.</p>
<p>I also don’t like the front end. It apears to have a nasty fish face from the less vertical headlight placement. If it really is this ugly it would be a deal breaker for me. So sad bècause I had been hanging out for the F 55.</p>
<p>It looked good in the spy photos last week, but not so much now. Yes, let’s hope it is due to the camera angles. Now, If the Black one is an S, then judging by the rear spoilers, is the yellow one a JCW, and red one non-S Cooper?</p>
<p>We’re not expecting anything JCW related at launch.</p>
<p>The yellow one has a different rear spoiler than the red or black one.
The yellow one has the S on the front grill, and the black one has Cooper S on the back also so both apparently are S, but still they have different rear spoilers?</p>
<p>MINI may introduce “Lines” with more visual distinctions as BMW has.</p>
<p>If these are Euro spec cars, could the one of them be the Cooper SD?</p>
<p>If these are Euro spec cars, could the one of them be the Cooper SD?</p>
<p>I love the spoiler on the yellow one, but I despise those BMW “lines”. Isn’t that just a way to increase the price by forcing you into a pre-programmed set of options? Is it even possible to buy one without a “line” for the base price?</p>
<p>Another way of adding content to pad the profit line. More bling and not a lot of substance. BMW Lines add $2K to the cost of the 3 Series.</p>
<p>I just checked the BMW website. It seems that you can get one without lines, but then you are restricted from getting many of the options that you may want. On another note, it looks like the yellow one has the halos, and the other ones do not. Could be another option, like the spoiler.</p>
<p>The previous spy shots were more promising I don’t understand what happened to the front, it looks ugly! I really hope it’s just the angle and zoom, but my first impression is this looks like the made in China MINI clone (Lifan 320). The “center speedo” in the interior looks even bigger than before? <a href="http://www.autoblog.com/photos/2014-mini-cooper-spy-shots/#photo-6003039/" rel="nofollow ugc">http://www.autoblog.com/photos/2014-mini-cooper-spy-shots/#photo-6003039/</a></p>
<p>It’s all the angle. You can take any number of gorgeous cars and shoot them from 200 yards 50ft up and they’ll all look flat and awkward.</p>
<p>When we first saw this car, you guys told us the front overhang looked way too long because of the camo all over it. Now you’re telling us the car is ugly because of the camera angle. Ever stop to consider that perhaps the car is just plain ugly?</p>
<p>The front overhang on those spy shots was longer than what you’re seeing here because of added cladding. We’ve also reported that the overhang would grow, and why.</p>
<p>Wait… so, if it’s due to some bad angles, then:</p>
<p>A) Why does EVERY angle look bad?
B) Why didn’t previous generation spy shots also look bad?</p>
<p>I have no doubt the official press release photos will be more flattering. But still, the “lipstick on a pig…” phrase exists for a reason. Take a photo of a Lambo or Vette from nearly angle or distance and it still looks good. This just… doesn’t.</p>
<p>disappointed.</p>
<p>Overall I am pretty disappointed. I could list all the things that bug me but it starts and ends with the HUGE tail lights. I don’t like the current R56 lights and these are even bigger. It makes the car look cartoonish.</p>
<p>That was my first impression too, I thought it looked far too “cutesy,” and much less angry. I was surprised when I saw my R56 from above and to the side, it looks very aggressive from these angles, yet I rarely get to see it. When they talked about some sort of angel eyes for the MINI headlights, I thought they meant a small circle like on BMWs, not some massive, hideous surrounds that make it look like a pooping baby.</p>
<p>I may end up eating these words, but from everything I’ve seen of this car so far, it’s ugly, and lost the wheels at all corners look that makes the current MINIs so great looking.</p>
<p>Not happy with the tail lights, either.</p>
<p>I hated the early R56 tail lights, but love the 2011+ LCI refresh lights. They added the chrome inner ring, which gave it a more high tech look that looks great to me.</p>
<p>I was hoping the inner chrome rings were going to make the jump to the F56.</p>
<p>That’s interesting. Having already Plasti-Dipped the tail light surrounds on my 2011 LCI R56S, I have been trying to figure out how to black-out those chrome inner rings!</p>
<p>Way sells a set of black line lci taillights that blacks out that ring. I’ve got them on my GP and they look awesome!</p>
<p>I like the fact that the LCI lights are 3 dimensional – they have depth to them. Chrome or blackout- whatever suits you. The early R56 and new F56 tail lights are flat, no depth or texture or anything giving it character. That is what disappoints me.</p>
<p>This makes me very glad</p>
<p>…that I got an R56.</p>
<p>Things I like: The bottom of the rear fascia
Things I don’t like: The rest</p>
<p>TOTALLY F…What are they smoking!???</p>
<p>Now i can sleep better…! ( I’ll keep my 2009 JCW for another cycle…Mini 4th Gen?)</p>
<p>I would suggest everyone take solace in the fact that the less stupid the angle of the photograph, the less awkward the car looks. That’s not a coincidence.</p>
<p>As for the front end: Everyone said they loved the Rocketman. MINI listened. Why the backlash now?</p>
<p>No, “everyone” didn’t love the Rocketman — I thought it looked ridiculous, and this nose is exactly what I was afraid of when they said they were using Rocketman design cues in the F56.</p>
<p>Okay, you got me. “Everyone” was an overstatement. Hyperbole for effect.</p>
<p>There are obviously outliers in every group (I, for instance, don’t think the R50 is particularly attractive compared to the R53 and R56), but the Rocketman was an incredibly popular design exercise. If I had such a success and was constantly being asked when I’d being bringing that product to market, you can bet that some styling details from it would show up in other work.</p>
<p>That’s the problem, they listened to Mini fans, when in fact they should try selling this car to non-Mini fans. Mini fans liked the Rocketman because it was SMALLER, so they came out with a BIGGER car and used the parts from the Rocketman that looked awkward (to me). We’ll see what the car looks like in person, but at these angles the R56 looks great.</p>
<p>Interesting position you’ve chosen. I seem to recall plenty of outrage over attempts to woo non-MINI fans with the Countryman…</p>
<p>As for the F56 being ALL CAPS BIGGER…I’m not sure that a couple of cm deserves the reaction. Especially if, as has been reported, it’s actually LOSING weight.</p>
<p>Bingo.</p>
<p>You’re right, MINI should listen both to their biggest fans and people who are not familiar with the brand. Only listening to non-MINI fans will result in bigger, heavier cars that do not offer any of the sporting character of the R53 and R56. Only listening to us MINI fans would probably result in something indistinguishable from the current car. I don’t honestly know who they listened to. All I can tell is that the EU’s overbearing regulations ruined the short front overhang, and MINI did the rest.</p>
<p>About the car getting bigger, what’s frustrating is that it looks bigger because of that front overhang. It’s also frustrating in principle that every new model they have released has gotten larger, and looked significantly larger. MINIs are supposed to buck the trend and stay small. Perhaps they, like BMW will introduce a new, smaller car down the line once a MINI hatch is the size of a Suburban. That’s what the Rocketman was supposed to be. To be honest, I thought the Rocketman was ugly, (and I wasn’t alone) but I absolutely loved the idea of a smaller MINI.</p>
<p>Every new model they have released has gotten larger? Like the Coupe and the Roadster?</p>
<p>Those are both the same length and width as the hatch with less interior space, so yes. Making the same car and taking out the rear seats doesn’t count as making a smaller car, I’m talking exterior dimensions, not interior space.</p>
<p>So…if something stays the same width and length, that counts as growing bigger? Man, that is awesome news for penises everywhere!</p>
<p>Now you’re just being petulant. Every new iteration of the hatch has become larger. The coupe and roadster are essentially the same car from the steering wheel down, and have the same dimensions. In other words, they take up the exact same amount of space on the road as the hatch. They’re not really a new car, just a variation on the hatch (technically the convertible, which they’re based on).</p>
<p>More pedantic than petulant, but I did just turn one of your factual inaccuracies into a dick joke, so I’ll take petulant too.</p>
<p>Each generation has gotten lighter, faster and more efficient. What size gains have happened are regulatory related and very, very small. The car has not gotten bigger, it has only really changed shape over the past two generations.</p>
<p>What you say is true, however I would argue that each car has looked quite a bit larger than the one before it. Many cars have used bulges and “fat” to make the car look bigger than it really is. The R56 had a lot more bulges than the R53, and the R60 has even more. Each successive Mini looks like it ate at McDonald’s for years, and the F56 with its bigger nose and overweight rear lights looks this way as well.</p>
<p>Sure, you could argue that the car is growing up, but this is a Mini, the size is in the name, it should look small too. As much as I don’t like the styling of the Fiat 500, at least it looks small. In a world where a “small” car is a 4 door sedan that can fit a family of 5 and their luggage for a week, Mini needs to stand out by looking small. The Rocketman did that. The F56 does not.</p>
<p>Saying the car “looks bigger” is not the same as it actually being bigger, which is what so often gets tossed around. People say it as though it’s fact, when the car’s actual footprint hasn’t changed appreciably since the R50 and it’s only actually gotten lighter. If the car actually does get meaningfully bigger, I’ll be just as up in arms about it as you.</p>
<p>More pedantic than petulant, but given the type of joke I just twisted your factual inaccuracy into, yeah, I’ll take petulant too.</p>
<p>Speaking of factual inaccuracies, I’m not sure that you’re on firm ground claiming that being based on the same platform precludes something being a different car/model. It would probably come as exciting news to those who complain about MINI having too many models, thoguh…</p>
<p>When it comes to design issues, they shouldn’t be listening to the crowd, they should have a strong sense of aesthetics that guides their vision for the vehicle. Nobody ever made a beautiful car by combining ad hoc design elements that people liked on the internet.</p>
<p>Got it: Opinions on the internet don’t matter. Couldn’t agree more!</p>
<p>The nose is a deal breaker for me. I get the new European standards thing, but without having the wheels at the 4 corners, it’s something else entirely. I’m guessing a different version for the north american market isn’t in the real of possibility?</p>
<p>Will be waiting a few years to see what the new re-imagined coupe/roadster look like – I have a good feeling about that release.</p>
<p>The Fiat 500 doesn’t have any overhang at all. Cue people listing “reasons” for the MINI’s overhang here. It’s irrelevant to people with eyeballs. Other cars don’t have the overhang, and by that measure, the MINI has failed.</p>
<ol>
<li><p>I’m fairly certain that the Fiat was designed before the current pedestrian standards were put into place. If you look at the new 500L, you’ll get a better idea of where the industry is going (or has to go).</p></li>
<li><p>The packaging of the 500 is different. It has a shorter overhang, bit it’s also taller. They have to get all the components to fit somehow.</p></li>
</ol>
<p>While I know that it is possible to take a bad picture of ANY car, even my R52 this thing is just UGLY I am sorry but that looks like a scared goldfish.</p>
<p>Anyone who was waiting for this car and after seeing these pictures is still waiting needs to get their head checked. This is a great thing, we can all order the better looking car now before it is gone!</p>
<p>It’s obvious that the photography is screwing with perceptions big time. The rake of the headlight lenses is 30 degrees different, depending on the pic.</p>
<p>It is interesting that none of the few who have actually seen the “real deal” in person are wailing about the MINI world coming to an end. Take a deep breath, people.</p>
<p>That may be simply because very few people have seen the car in person who may be considered objective on the matter.</p>
<p>I had a chance to see the car in person and yes the front is as bad as it looks in the pictures. Public feed back on styling caused the mess. All that looked good individually just didn’t mix well. The photos actually aren’t that distorted when it comes to the front end.</p>
<p>Initial thoughts – the scoop does, in fact, appear to be much smaller causing a visual/proportion issue that we’re simply not used to. In combination with the smaller scoop, the MINI wings/badge on the bonnet is larger (maybe the same size as the Countryman/Paceman) further throwing off the proportions we are used to seeing for the last 10 plus years. The rear lift handle has increased in size quite a bit and the rear MINI wings/badge has moved to the lift handle. This, combined with the larger taillights and less sheet metal on the boot, changes the proportions we’re used to seeing on the back side.</p>
<p>I’m having the most trouble with the front bumper and grille area but the skewed perspective of these photos aren’t helping so I’ll do my best to reserve judgement. The addition of flat ridge in the body above the fender arches is less distracting than I thought it would be. Also, I don’t mind the curves added to the sides but the addition of the ridge at the bottom of the metal on the sides makes the car look even higher off the ground than it really is. Here’s hoping a future aero kit will help with this illusion. European pedestrian standards are making overhangs on most cars frighteningly large. The F56 is no exception.</p>
<p>There’s so much to process here but it DOES still look like a MINI so kudos to the design team for the overall look. It reminds me of how derided the R56 design was when we all first saw it. Screams of , “They’re ruining the brand!” have echoed though the comments here at Motoringfile and White Roof Radio all too often over the past 10 years and we’re all still here (most of us). ;-)</p>
<p>OMG…..the front lights is like a huge termite…..!!!! I prefer my 2007 cooper</p>
<p>Well, this is unfortunate. Not even in a “it’ll grown on me” kind of way… The R53 was great, the R56 was watered down a bit but nice-looking, but this… this just has no redeeming qualities.</p>
<p>Quick! Buy an R56 while you still can!</p>
<p>dont worry, I have an R56….and IS SO MUCH BETTER than the new one….</p>
<p>This looks like they were trying to take it more in the direction of the Fiat 500. Need to see it in person, but I think this has gone too far in the wrong direction.</p>
<p>Fiat looks smaller except the front does look like the bigger Fiat 500L, giant grill opening with bumper inside.</p>
<p>So they added halo lights? I do like the wings better. Wondering if the US version would have the gas cap on the right side as well since that looks like a driving is on the left side.</p>
<p>I feel like that front grill/bumber design was meant so that it creates an illusion that it’s not sticking out so much and it’s more compact. I still feel it’s getting a but too long and bigger than the brand name titles it to be: MINI.</p>
<p>The fuel filler will now be on the right side in all markets. Too bad, I like it on the left.</p>
<p>The overhangs are not that bad in real life and is more acceptable in appearance because you can see the design work that surrounds the headlights form the bonnet flutes and the arches around the wheel arches bulk out a little instead of just a flat arch and it does balance out with the licence plate.</p>
<p>The new MINIs are undergoing film and photography in Los Angeles currently.</p>
<p>I read the comments here first, then looked at the photos.
You folks are being a bunch of drama queens!</p>
<p>I hated the interior photos from a while back, but this exterior looks great!</p>
<p>I like it too. It is still instantly recognizable as MINI. The vast majority of the public won’t even notice that the model has changed. “drama queens” is the right description for many of the reactions here.</p>
<p>You are 100% right. Case in point; I had my girlfriend look at the pictures on Autoblog and the reaction was “it looks the same (as the R56) to me”.</p>
<p>and this is the exact problem I have with it … nothing “dramatic” changed visually.
I guess I am still waiting for the model to make me fall in love all over again.
Maybe the next gen Clubman will be more daring.</p>
<p>I wish Disqus had a text/sentiment analysis tool for MotoringFile to automatically remove some of the comments I read.</p>
<p>Most of you are making a final call based on photos that have been taken from a long distance and with an awkward angle. How can anyone, even someone with a very low IQ, judge the F56 this way? No one can make a final assessment except those who have seen the car live. As pointed out, the MINI design team listened to community when it gave glowing reviews of the Rocketman and consequently applied some of the design cues to this new model but now everyone is screaming “the brand is ruined!!”, “buy a R56 now!!”. Are you people for real? Unfortunately yes. I bet the same people are complaining about iOS7 (which is still in beta by the way!) and shouting “Apple is doomed”, “Steve Jobs would have never let that happen”. Guess what, Apple is still one of the most valuable companies in the world and MINI keeps on breaking sales records.</p>
<p>So please, be patient and wait to see proper pictures of the car or to see it live to give your final judgment. Maybe you won’t like and that is totally fine but please just be patient. In the meantime, thank Gabe and Nathaniel for not turning commenting off and thank the MINI design team for their hard work and for letting fans criticize them when most of us don’t have a clue what design is all about.</p>
<p>You want to remove the comments of people who disagree with you? Do you work for the NSA or something?</p>
<p>If you understand what the NSA is doing, you would know that they don’t want to remove people’s comments from websites as this one. On the contrary, the more you share, the more they know about you…</p>
<p>What I suggest is to turn-off comments altogether or to allow commenting for carefully chosen opportunities/articles.</p>
<p>As one of my favorite bloggers puts it “most publishers want comments simply because it gives the illusion that they care about their community. If the majority of comments were actually thoughtful and useful, this may be different. But they’re not. Everyone knows it. Anyone who says otherwise is lying. Welcome to the Internet. Not only is it too much work to moderate and curate a good comment section, it’s ultimately impossible. It’s a never-ending game of whack-a-mole with more and more moles appearing the more popular the site is.”</p>
<p>Regarding MotoringFile specifically, I believe Gabe and Nathaniel truly care about their audience but I’d bet they find the commenting system hard to manage even for smart editorial people as they are. I believe they even mentioned it here or on WRR. Quite often I’ve seen the discussion on MotoringFile devolved because there are simply too many voices not adding value to the conversation. This is exactly what’s happening right now. Too many people make quick judgements (“buy a R56 now!!”) based on sparse information thus adding no value whatsoever to the information provided in the first place. That is why I would turn comments off.</p>
<p>I completely disagree with you. I believe even those people who just came to leave a two word comment like “This sucks” are adding something to the conversation. They’re letting everyone know that they do not like the new car. It’s not like this website has a serious problem with trolls.</p>
<p>With regard to the NSA, perhaps the CIA is a better example, since they are pursuing a man who revealed that they are violating the Constitution. Sure, I know the situation is different, but there are parallels… Wanting to remove those who you deem unworthy from a discussion is censorship, and is only going to make those who value a free discussion board view you as a ruthless headstrong dictator. I’m a Libertarian, but I don’t believe we should remove all of the Democrats and Republicans from politics, since they would not be represented.</p>
<p>Sure, I know it’s a private website, and the owner can do whatever they wish, but if they ban people for or remove comments simply because they disagree with them, their fanbase will consist only of those who agree, and what fun is that?</p>
<p>Unfortunately with great power comes great responsibility, and most forum owners see themselves as some type of god who should remove those they deem unworthy from their website. They’re left with a community that is not welcoming or open.</p>
<p>In summary, if the owners of this site removed all of the bad comments, the free market would serve up another MINI site with owners who believed that the freedom of speech applies to the internet too.</p>
<p>Everybody is certainly entitled to their opinion and we love hearing all of them, even the ones we don’t agree with. Our main concern for the comments is that the discourse stay civil and non-personal. No “you’re an idiot” name calling or defamatory speech. Beyond that, if people dislike this MINI or any other, that’s their opinion and we’re happy to have them share it here. As often as reactions are knee-jerk or simply predictable, real conversation happens too. If everybody just agreed with MINI or with us, what fun would that be? Part of being a real fan of something is un-apologetically wanting it to be great. Not everybody agrees on what “great” means, but that’s half the fun.
There’s one key thing to keep in mind in reading <em>any</em> comments on the internet: Look between the lines. What people say, and especially how they say it. usually says more about them than it does about the thing they’re commenting on.
As for comments here. Keep them coming. There’s a lot I don’t agree with, and that doesn’t matter. Those are <em>their</em> opinions. Gabe and I have the other side of the fold to share <em>our</em> opinions (and comments too).</p>
<p>What my comments say about me is that I think the new Mini is ugly. And I think it is ugly. Oh, one more thing: I think the new Mini is really really ugly.</p>
<p>I’ll hold judgement until I see it in person. I’ve seen it too many times that when a new design hits, people very quickly jump to either side of the love it or hate it. I see some things I like, some I don’t. But as long as it’s still a MINI at heart and can continue to grow the brand.</p>
<p>Bring on the Clubman!!</p>
<p>Last week, I hypothesized about that new color’s antecedent being a child’s toy, but I’ve reconsidered:</p>
<p><a href="http://blog.syracuse.com/orangefootball/2007/07/SyracuseUnivJul07-3381.JPG" rel="nofollow ugc">http://blog.syracuse.com/orangefootball/2007/07/SyracuseUnivJul07-3381.JPG</a></p>
<p>My first reaction: LOOKS TERRIBLE, after processing it, I actually like it a lot. It pays homage to the R53 quite a bit. Good for MINI for making such a bold design move. Can’t wait to see official shots, and I’m really looking forward to the F55.</p>
<p>I’m sorry, but where do you see R53 in this?</p>
<p>Black middle-bumper-thing aside, The smaller grille, more tapered front, lower hood (as far as I can tell), headlight angle remind me of the R53.</p>
<p>Ok, I’ll give you the smaller grille, which had grown too much for my taste as well. But unfortunately it doesn’t seem to flow with the rest of the front:</p>
<p>a) Bumper
b) Bottom Grille shape/size
c) Smaller hood scoop</p>
<p>That and the rear lights are far too big.</p>
<p>The hood/bonnet bump.</p>
<p>Really? That bump has a much in common with the R53 as the Jag E-Type. Actually the E-Type is more similar to the R53.</p>
<p>I totally see R50/3 influence in the way the bonnet slopes down. I actually prefer the R56’s beefier shape, but I know that, at least on the internet, I am in the minority there.</p>
<p>Come on BMW/MINI, cat’s out of the bag. Let’s have the real pics.
The version with the correctly proportioned tail lights.</p>
<p>It only has room for improvement in person. It sure is aesthetically challenged in the photo shoot.</p>
<p>1 UGLY “thing” in the front bumper. That can’t stay as it would seem to block too much of the grill opening.</p>
<p>2 The roof line seems to have more slope. Not liking that…</p>
<p>3 Odd junction where the rear wheel surround meets the rear valence panel.</p>
<p>4 I could do without the LEDs around the headlights. Looks like cheap Christmas decorations.</p>
<p>5 The hood scoop AND small power bulge seem to fight each other for significance.</p>
<p>6 Is the fuel filler actually on our passenger side or is that a flipped image?</p>
<p>The fuel fill is now going to be on the right side.</p>
<p>i don’t like the front of the car. the rear is okay.</p>
<p>:/</p>
<p>i have a feeling that the next aero kit will be a must have with the F56.</p>
<p>Only if the next aero kit involves ripping the whole front end and back end off and replacing it with something completely different. If that’s the case, then yes. Please provide a new aero kit. Please. We’re begging…</p>
<p>Overall, I’m mostly OK with it. I think it’ll look better in my preferred darker colors.
Unless this is a LHD car and the photo is reversed, they’re moving the fuel filler cap to the other side of the car, that’ll take getting used to for sure.
So the tail lights are a bit bigger, that’s OK, at least they’re not the Buick wrap-arounds like the Paceman. I was a bit worried.
The side scuttle stopped being functional (as far as it was) with the R56, and this new treatment looks OK, but I’m not convinced it’s the final form, it’s as if they couldn’t decide to go Countryman vertical or not. But it doesn’t bother me much.
I hope the DRL isn’t as bright as it appears here, that’ll look a bit odd. But given the shooting conditions, I expect it’s not that drastic-looking in real life.
The chrome trim on the boot — please be part of the chrome-line exterior! I’m a bit concerned that the hatch seems to wrap around the lights, that could make for some interesting alignment issues. The belt is already out of alighment on one of those shown.
There is a bit of a crease on the side near the bottom, and some a bit near the scuttle, but not the bold BMW-creases I was worried about, but it takes away from the roundness.
The front bumper though being black — that does look odd to me and it’ll take getting used to. It doesn’t protrude much, so maybe it’ll be OK. But here it looks like something was stuck on after the fact. I live in a front-license mandatory state, and I’m hoping that’ll break up the vast expanse of plastic, but I’m worried it’ll also look stuck on. Not happy with the overhang, but it’s not as bad as it was, and it’ll definitely affect folks wanting to lower the car.
We’ll still end up with at least one. My 2007 is hitting 100K soon, and my wife’s 2004 isn’t far behind, and she’s ready for a new car, but wants to wait for the F56. Her new car comes first.</p>
<p>That front overhang is excessive. The tail lights are too. I’ve been looking forward to buying the next mini but I think I’ll save myself a big chunk of cash and have the Honda Jazz (Fit) instead. That will go for ten years without suffering the failures my current Mini did too.</p>
<p>the front end is problematic. the same can be said for the latest BMWs. sorry, the pedestrian safety requirements do not mean the designers have to go out of their way to make the front end unappealing. the headlights are way too busy. hideous actually.</p>
<p>on the flipside, the rear end is interesting, kinda reminds me of an old British car like an MG.</p>
<p>good luck with this one MINI</p>
<p>I have high hopes for this car. I’m really hoping they have a deal with borg warner to get the same front differential the 2015 GTI is getting on it’s performance pack. If they offer that as an option this mini will be awesome.</p>
<p>Gabe/Nathaniel : Any intel on getting that sweet differential?</p>
<p>This is really a comment for the eds: Why so much Mini apologism? Check the opinion here and on other site – it’s pretty consistently against the look. Why does it always seem like this site supports all new Mini designs? A little editorial objectivity might be appreciated.</p>
<p>More on topic: it looks like a guppy.</p>
<p>Most of our commentary so far has concerned the what and the why. We will definitely editorialize on what we think is the good and the bad, but we haven’t actually done that yet. Just because I say the nose got bigger because of regs doesn’t mean I like a bigger nose. Nor does it mean I don’t like it. It’s just the what and the why of it at the moment. When we share our opinion, you’ll know it. Tune in to White Roof Radio for the soonest.</p>
<p>10 years of people claiming the sky is falling only to change their minds tends to put critism in perspective.</p>
<p>Additionally having more info than most on this car I can look at most comment and know that they aren’t well informed but off the cuff and driven be poor information.</p>
<p>Chicken MINIs, if you will?</p>
<p>Looks. Like. Crap. By misinformation do you mean that the picture is distorted? Or the picture is not a Mini? The comments posted aren’t saying that the car drives poorly. Or that the drive-train was designed improperly.
We are all saying that it looks ugly. Ugly. Because we saw pictures of it. And in the pictures, it looks ugly.</p>
<p>Every time MINI does anything new, the majority of immediate comments are negative. Then over time, people come to like that thing and when the next new thing comes along, use the thing everybody used to hate as the benchmark for why the next new thing is so awful.
There’s nothing wrong with this. It’s actually kind of entertaining, but it is pretty consistent.</p>
<p>I’m a huge MINI fan have been since I was a kid with the
classics. I drive a R56 Cooper that from new is now five years old. I was
holding as I loved the idea of the V3 engine. Pity the design department has
let the side down. It’s horrendous and getting slated every mini site going. What
is the idea behind those stupid huge rear lights? Do they drug test employees
as who ever signed that of should be shown the door. So MINI has given it
repeat loyal Customers a car that has no personality or desire to be a MINI.
The over hand from the R56 squat mean front is laughable. MINI is going to turn
round in five years and say remember when wee sold cars like hot cakes what
happened. I’ll tell you why, you went less MINI Retro and pushed to far and
lost customers to fiat, VW, Audi and dare I say it Vauxhall new Adam city car.
Even this beats this. Who ordered an Ugly, soft looking MINI when we want Cute
with a dash of meanness thrown in to remind us of the Racing heritage. So my options unless this comes over totally different
in the flash is a late build R56, Audi A1 or Fiat 500 Arbath. Cheers MINI
making the desirable – Not!!!!!</p>
<p>I’m in agreement with those that think the front overhang appears to to be way too generous. And the rear taillights look comically huge. Also the decision to eliminate the “island” tail lights seems to be a cost saving measure at the expense of being both “MINI” and premium. I feel the same way about the rear MINI badge. It looks like a cheap plastic logo incorporated into the boot hatch handle. Was this decision to save some production costs as well?</p>
<p>The latest NOT NORMAL brand video was inspiring to watch but it doesn’t seem to be a guiding principle for MINI in their latest efforts. For instance: Window control switches on the doors = Normal. Speedometer located in front of the driver = Normal. Tail lights set adjacent to rear hatch opening = Normal. While it can be argued that those little things don’t matter much overall to the brand I would argue that they mean everything. Losing those differentiating details normalizes the car. I’ve read that MINI HQ in Munich has some sayings that guide them, one of them is “be true to what you believe” and another is “we do things differently.” Are we still seeing that attitude and differentiation from MINI HQ?</p>
<p>Lastly, it looks like the rear roof is sloping like the Paceman (which I can’t sit in the back seat of the Paceman without my head touching the ceiling unlike the Countryman). It makes me wonder if the original design concept of MINI has been compromised in some fashion. Will four normal size adults be able to sit in the new F56 MINI as they were in the original mini or Rxx MINI’s? Or has some rear headroom been sacrificed for style?</p>
<p>Cue DB poking fun at my post – “They’re ruining the brand man!”</p>
<p>When I first saw the coupe in pictures I thought it was ugly. when I saw it in person I fell in love at first sight. Totally changed my mind, now I own one. First impressions can be jarring, especially early ones like these. Chill. When you see one on the showroom floor up close it may just change your perception.</p>
<p>Wtf is wrong with MINI. Their designs are getting worse with every new car release (except Paceman is better than Countryman). Blah….disgusting. It’s starting to make me embarrassed to be part of the MINI family. R53 FTW.</p>
<p>I totally agree that the 1st generation Mini was perfect design, and every release gets uglier, and uglier. I wish they kept that car small. It just looks awkward on the larger car platform.</p>
<p>I’m disappointed because the details aren’t as tight as I had hoped. If you remove the “mouthguard” black piece across the grill and just have the grill a single clean component, it could have looked so much better. Patterned opening for the S models and slat based for the cooper. I know they need some sort of structural bracing under that component but I wonder if they could have hid it behind the grill. Maybe the Euro crash regulations put the end to that design idea.</p>
<p>I also think the lower grill adds too much unneeded detail. If they kept it as simple as the rocketman concept, it could have looked really sleek and sporty. It feels like they added a detail for the sake of adding a detail. Negative space is a good thing.</p>
<p>The taillight proportion looks a little too large as well. I like how they have them extruded from the body but the scale just looks off which adds to the cartoon feel to it. If they reduced the size of the those lights by 30% it could have looked better.</p>
<p>JM,
Totally agree about the unneeded detail in the lower grill area. Also the detailing of the side scuttles is what I would call overconsidered. Add simplicity.</p>
<p>I agree that the bumper insert looks bad. Ford Fiesta ST and Focus ST models don’t have that, and they look much better in the front.</p>
<p>I’m no longer waiting for the new one, I’ll take the R56, looks way better.</p>
<p>My 0.5 cent; from these pics I REALLY like that Orange. The slope to the bonnet seems a bit odd. Brake Ducts do NOT seem to flow with the rest of the front end. Rear spoiler on the S looks like it may be semi-functional. Rear trim “curve” to make room for exhaust looks too big and the chrome trim doesn’t do it any favors. Those Halos are friggin BRIGHT 🙂 I can’t wait to see this in the sheet metal and hopefully in darker colors.</p>
<p>Unless I missed it, no one yet has commented on the lack of signal repeaters in the mirrors. Previous spy shots had the camo strip that led to the signal speculation.</p>
<p>We had reported this spring that those were fake bad there to throw us off.</p>
<p>I read this several times per day but must have missed that. Thanks.</p>
<p>Happens to the best of us :)</p>
<p>Actually, I just went back to May and Bimmerfile Michael said that EU regs require them, but MINI might be able to get creative. Guess they got creative. I’m good either way.</p>
<p>We assumed they were going to be there. But I got some specific info this spring saying the F56 won’t have them. Michael didn’t believe me :)</p>
<p>Thanks Gabe. I always appreciate the great info you guys have. Been following closely for several years and am finally on the verge of being able to have a MINI in my garage, so am now following with great anticipation.</p>
<p>Agreed – the lights are some of the worst I’ve seen.</p>
<p>I agree, ugly front, very ugly front, looks like a fish.</p>
<p>It’s too Flash Gordon type of thing. Why can’t BMW designers follow the Porsche 911 evolution of design where you can still say it follows the original “classic” design….Sorry to say this design is becoming more cartonish and comical…..guess I have to get the R56 now!</p>
<p>While I do like the halo effect in the headlamps (like the Rocketman concept), I think overall, the front end is disappointing. Overall, the car resembles a sickly/startled bottom-dwelling sucker fish from the Laurentian Abyss.</p>
<p>The massive black bumper bar going through the middle of the grille area looks like the engineers, bean-counters and lawyers all got together and over-ruled the designers.</p>
<p>It will be good to see less distorted photography, certainly, but these two shortcomings will not improve much, if any from that…</p>
<p>That halo on the headlamps looked great on the Rocketman because the entire car was just out there … in a cool way.</p>
<p>But to stick those on a car that pretty much looks like the R56 with a new front and rear bumper is pretty much the same as Joey adding aftermarket LED’s to his 10 year old car. At least that’s what it looks like to me.</p>
<p>“If you think the interior looks like crap, wait until you see the OUTSIDE!” Good grief, MINI…</p>
<p>WTF. They have surpassed KIA and Smart in terms of galactically stupid-looking design. When I see a Pontiac Aztec I want to roll up to the driver and ask them “WTF were you thinking?”. This is beyond that. This is like, “don’t be surprised if you get randomly punched” annoyingly ugly.</p>
<p>Cars should scowl or frown – maybe sneer – or better yet have no facial expression at all. They shouldn’t smile (yeah you, Mazda!). They sure as sh!t shouldn’t look like a cartoon character that got kicked in the crotch while sucking on a lemon.</p>
<p>If “cartoonish” had sex with “abominable”, this would be their unwanted bastard child. If ever I doubted the existence of Satan and all of his works, I doubt no more. This is so bad it is the plastic manifestation of evil.</p>
<p>Why don’t we turn the final season of Mad Men into a Glee-like musical? Why don’t we commission PSY to re-create the entire Beatles body of work Gandam-style? Why don’t we green-light the sequel to Saving Private Ryan with Justin Bieber in the lead role?</p>
<p>With this new design, Mini is coming clean on a secret they’ve harbored all of these years: “We’ve hated each and every one of you all along!”</p>
<p>I have a question. I have seen several times on this site that the F56 JCW will not be part of the F56 launch next year. Does this mean there won’t be a JCW hardtop in the lineup for a year of so after the launch, or will they still be offering the R56 JCW in the interim. It would seem strange if there is a JCW version of every model except the hardtop.</p>
<p>I asked multiple MA’s at multiple dealerships. They all tell me the JCW will be available mid 2014. I’m sure it’s a guess, as none of them had hard facts.</p>
<p>Hey! I wonder if Paceman’s going to go cabrio? Is mini making a paceman cabrio any soon??</p>
<p>Looks better than I expected. Slightly disappointed that the halo isn’t 360*. The rear looks great though, best rear to date I think… the view that most people will get of a Cooper S ;)</p>
<p>Not going to make any big comments on these photos, not a great vantage. However one thing I am disliking across the current rage out there with designers, the drop slope of the roofline to the rear. Seems like I am seeing this everywere these days across a lot of brands. To me I have concerns about visablity out of the car. The front overhang (I know its pedestrian standards) is making the front end look out of scale. Will wait to see it once we get some good shots.</p>
<p>Did Issigonis dream of whoever “rocketman” is? I don’t think so. I do not know what BMW is thinking in their drawing board of coming up of a un-classical design of without reference to to the original. Maybe “us” who disdain this design should petition BMW to re-consider in launching this “un-mini like” car….as the saying goes “If ain’t broke don’t fix it”.</p>
<p>With a little editing, this post is a pretty great poem.</p>
<p>Did Issigonis dream
Of whoever “Rocketman” is?
is thinking
in their drawing board
of coming up
of an unclassical design
of without reference
to to
the original
Maybe us.</p>
<p>With a little editing, this post is a pretty great poem.</p>
<p>Did Issigonis dream
Of whoever “Rocketman” is?
is thinking
in their drawing board
of coming up
of an unclassical design
of without reference
to to
the original
Maybe us.</p>
<p>Can we please get a Poll going on what people think about this car?
I personally think it doesn’t look like a Mini anymore…Longer hood, for European regulations, ugly side panels that don’t have that mini retro feeling to them anymore.
The R50-R53 had a simplistic feeling to it with some really unique things like the center speedo and 4 wheels on the corners. This is just another car now…
the rear looks like a Nissan micra from the 90s..
I’d like to remind myself what I loved about the R53.
The wide plastic wheel arches that just protruded from the body.
the Porsche like front facing headlights. The SMALL rear taillights that made the mini look FAT, in a good way! The low riding seats. The interior with minimalist tubing that had a kind of steam punk feeling to it. The thing is that Mini is doing the NOT NORMAL campaign but what they’ve become is normal and predictable.
I love Minis but the love is over now :(</p>
<p>We’ll happily do a poll as soon as we have proper, un-distorted photos that people can actually judge the car by. These are like paparazzi photos taken through a telescope of a supermodel cleaning out a sink disposal. Not a flattering angle and not at all a fair representation of what the car actually looks like. Although I’m sure most of you will still hate it once the real photos come out, so hold your horses.</p>
<p>I understand, but a supermodel cleaning out the sink disposal will still look pretty hot. These, not so much.</p>
<p>You hit it on the nail Alessandro. There was not a line on the R50 that was not needed. Simplicity ruled.</p>
<p>MINI just send out a press relaese concerning this ‘bad’ pictures of the F56:</p>
<p>Oxford. Aggressive and relentless papping is something British celebrities have had to learn to live with. Members of the Royal Family, as well as actors, footballers and top models are all familiar with the sensation of being caught in uncompromising situations, and now MINI is the latest victim. Absolutely unaware and without make-up, the youngest member of our family was caught by sensationalist photographers in a highly private moment. The young one was yellow and completely defenceless. We understand the worldwide interest in our family but it is not the British way to send such unfavourable pictures around the globe.</p>
<p>But like a good stiff-upper-lipped Brit, MINI shall not complain, although we would like to officially state that we are not flattered. The published pictures do not reflect our good looks any way. As every celebrity knows, those extra long telephoto lenses have the devastating ability to negatively distort all surfaces, lines and angles. Therefore our advice: next time come closer to the object of desire. If that doesn’t work, don’t worry, shortly you will have the opportunity to experience the MINI up close and personal, and to take pictures from all angles.</p>
<p>After looking at the pics……
1) I actually like the front end much better than the R56. Still, the R53 had the best design and proportions. The R50 even more.
2) The sides are pretty much carry over. I was hoping for this 3rd generation to be more revolutionary than evolutionary. Seems to me the car is trapped in a timewarp, circa 2002. MINI is afraid to move away from the mold they created 10 years ago and they are unable to take the MINI on a new design direction altogether. My point is… Trying to stretch, modify and re-invent based on a 10+ year basic design is not going to do MINI any favors. Competitors are getting better and MINI is no longer the only game in town.
3) Interesting thatthe gas cap has been moved from the driver’s side to the passenger side. I guess this is to match the rest of BMW products.
4) Glad to see the return of the full rear wrap around glass,.
5) The rear is HIDEOUS. Whomever greenlighted that horrendous new butt should get fired. The tailights are even bigger than before and it just looks like a giant toad from behind. Really disgusting. Also lament the loss of separate body housings for the tailights. These are cheaper to manufacture/assemble and it shows.
Overall, the rest would have to be judged pending seeing the car in person. Hope the engine, suspension, transmission and interior is where the development Dollars went (Here I am hoping).
We like our R55 ’08 Clubman S quite a bit and look forward to replace it with a new F60 based Clubman but that will largerly depend on how MINI will improve (Or mess up) the upcoming Clubby.
I am glad I had 3 first generation MINIs. These new cars are a far cry from the launch models. Frank Stephenson’s work on the R50/53 is timelesss and will go down in history as the best new MINI design ever.</p>
<p>This seems to be the unfortunate route that all retro designs take. First edition: great raves. Second edition: not so much (usually just nip tuck with an unfortunate increase in size. In between face-lifts just add visual clutter. Third edition: What to do? either go back to the beginning or cut the cord and do a modern design.</p>
<p>Frank, there is a trim piece on the rear quarter windows, it looks to be way lower profile than the R56 trim piece but it is there.</p>
<p>MINI has a response….
<a href="https://www.press.bmwgroup.com/pressclub/p/pcgl/pressDetail.html?title=outrageous-mini-secretly-photographed-at-private-getaway&outputChannelId=6&id=T0143412EN&left_menu_item=node__2311" rel="nofollow ugc">https://www.press.bmwgroup.com/pressclub/p/pcgl/pressDetail.html?title=outrageous-mini-secretly-photographed-at-private-getaway&outputChannelId=6&id=T0143412EN&left_menu_item=node__2311</a></p>
<p>For all the complaints, if my mother saw this she’d instantly know it was a MINI. Would she know it was a completely new MINI? Only if it was side-by-side with a first and/or second gen. From the perspective of taking a BMW platform and making it look like a MINI to the plebeians, they’ve succeeded visually.</p>
<p>As so many others have said I also think the lower front valance seems inelegant and obtuse. However I said the same thing about the Fiat Abarth SS when I first saw it’s perfectly vertical nose with it’s pushed out doublechin. Although I still don’t think the Abarth’s front is naturally beautiful, I think it’s aggressiveness has grown on me and I think the F56 will as well.</p>
<p>Some of the details are revolution rather than evolutionary, but I like that. I don’t like the play-it-safe design of the R56 because it softened a lot of the character of the first gen and ruined the interior. As much as people are harping about the design, MINIs are about the driving experience and I’ll reserve judgement until this can actually be driven and seen in the flesh. Assuming it has electric power steering, it will be interesting to see if they can get it right.</p>
<p>I’ll be staying with my R53, skipping the R56 completely (unless I find a JCW Clubman which I think are pretty sexy) and skipping right into F56 ownership in a few years.</p>
<p>And with VW confirming today that the GTD (Diesel version of the GTI) will be coming to the US to join the already present diesel Golf hatch, here’s hoping the sales numbers will persuade MINI to bring the Cooper D and SD to the US with the F56 LCI refresh. I’d venture we’d be more likely to get the D rather than SD but that engine bay looks large enough to fit BMW’s 2.0L diesel I4… 181hp and 280lbs/ft sound great in a car smaller and lighter than a 328d! <a href="http://www.autoblog.com/2013/07/03/vw-confirms-golf-gtd-diesel-coming-to-us-for-2016/" rel="nofollow ugc">http://www.autoblog.com/2013/07/03/vw-confirms-golf-gtd-diesel-coming-to-us-for-2016/</a></p>
<p>wow, what a circus. I can’t imagine any 07 buyers that lived through the rantings of insecure owners would take part in this kind of whinging, but I could be wrong. I think the new Mini looks really cool, and I wonder if I’ll have my 07 too long to have one of these. I may be in for the next gen, with a hope that it could be all electic…</p>
<p>Insecure owners? You haven’t changed one bit haven’t you Mr. Lavardera?</p>
<p>” You haven’t changed one bit, have you”
true, still correcting you</p>
<p>Is it just me, or are the BMW-style creases we were expecting on the side not present in the final production version. As for the overall design, it is clear that the distance, zoom and camera angle have led to some distortions. The previous spy shots with minimal camo clearly give a more accurate idea of the front overhang, etc. than we are getting in these pictures.</p>
<p>They are there but subtle.</p>
<p>I am hoping MINI released these ‘spy’ shots to spur sales of the R56 and that the photos of the actual third generation MINIs will be of a totally different design.</p>
<p>WTF! The front end looks like a study in how far Mini could shove a hockey puck down the mouth of a catfish! Oversized brake lights with gobs of chrome everywhere a la Chrysler 200. What a mini nightmare!</p>