No truncated suicide doors. No SUV ride height. No gimmicks. OK, there’s a Mad Max/Fast and Furious sport button in front of the gear stick that repositions the boost earlier in the drop top’s rev range (i.e., sacrifices government pleasing mpg for power) and sharpens steering. The four pot providing said oomph is a “significantly revised” (i.e., larger air intake) version of the MINI Cooper S’ 1.6-litre turbocharged mill, the same unit found in the MINI CHALLENGE race car. GOT IT? How’s this for PR sneak: “Extra-large disc brakes paired with upgraded bright red Brembo performance callipers are supplied” [italics added]. The thirty-second MINI variant (and I don’t mean the zero to sixty time of the basest of the bast models) yields 132 hp per litre and 39.8 mpg. (Highway, downwind, windows up, a/c off, one-up, no luggage.) The hardtop version was one of the fastest things I’ve ever seen down a country road, I shit thee not. This will be a genuine hoot.
“Extra-large disc brakes paired with upgraded bright red Brembo performance callipers are supplied.”
Well I’m glad they supplied brakes. “Extra large” and “bright red” is just icing on the cake.
I’m trying to convince my wife to pick this as her next car.
I’m sure we can stuff the kids in the back.
I don’t care, the giant gauge cluster in the center of the dash is still DUMB DUMB DUMB. Can we please get a redesign? If I wanted my car to look like this, I would just staple a pie plate to my dash.
I want to hate this car, but I can’t. I can’t hate the New Beetle, either (and have a guilty love for the convertible). It’s my inner metrosexual: no matter how much I try to suppress it, I can’t.
Even worse is that I have a special weakness for the Clubman. In dark brown with the interior that looks like bad vinyl furniture from the seventies.
A former coworker had the previous Cooper convertible. It’s a really nice car, though perhaps a hard sell next to the Miata, which is about as practical and more fun to drive.
I don’t care, the giant gauge cluster in the center of the dash is still DUMB DUMB DUMB.
The problem isn’t the centre-mount gauges in and of themselves, it’s their placement. If you drive a Yaris, Nissan X-Trail or Saturn Ion, the IP cluster is far up and away, within your line of sight and in a similar focusing plane as the road ahead. Measured by degrees they’re less distant from the road than traditional placement. They’re almost an HUD.
The Mini’s gauges are low, close and require a big look-away from the road. Very much “form over function”. Worse are the switches: they’re toggles, which is interesting, but safety requirements have them bracketed. They’re also not visually distinct from each other. And then there’s the HVAC controls, which are terrible.
Hey, is the “Open-o-meter” installed in the Works convertible?
Who misspelled “callipers?” The Brit’s, the Yankee PR wonks or RF (can’t be)?
Brit PR
I would take this in a heartbeat.
The thing weighs 2700 pounds and has ~200 HP. That’s all I really need to know, and I want it…
Ugly interior? People might think I’m gay?
I couldn’t care less if it goes like stink and handles like a possessed go kart.
Make mine French Racing Blue. Sacre Bleu!
Love my ’08 Mini. Sure, the interior is the definition of form over function, but it’s not as hard to live with as non-owners often envision. Speed can be digitally displayed in the tach, for example. Ultimately, however, the interior layout quickly became a minor nuisance once I realised just how well the rest of the car works as a driving machine.
the giant gauge cluster in the center of the dash is still DUMB DUMB DUMB.
If your complaint is about the interior design, you don’t get Mini. It’s hard to pay attention to the interior when you are motoring down country roads with a big, stupid grin on your face.
The ugly interior is made up for by the sidewalk option package, which gets you some sweet baseball-glove leather seats ala first Audi TT.
I hope we see more “tune” buttons in the future, I like the idea of being able to swap engine maps on the fly and sticking it to the man who mandates extra lean fuel maps. It’s becoming popular on motorcycles, using ignition curves (sometimes EFI settings).
Grrrrr. Cars like this frustrate me so much. I love so much about it: the specs are in a pretty sweet spot, especially in the weight and dimensions department. I’ve really enjoyed every Mini I’ve ridden in, and the one I’ve driven.
But it’s Front Wheel Drive, and that one aspect of its handling is still something I found objectionable, even if the overall experience was really nice.
Why oh why god of all things automotive can’t we have a rear wheel drive coupe that seats four–cramped is okay, it just has to do it–weighs under 2,800 lbs, handles like a 3 series, has power enough to get you in to trouble with dummy switch off, gets good mileage (20/26 or better feels good), and doesn’t feel like a cheap toy inside–something a 40-something adult with kids wouldn’t be embarrassed to be in.
Why? It’s killing me. I’m ready to buy a new second car that both my wife and I would be happy driving, that is fun, light, economical, RWD, with a manual transmission RIGHT NOW. New BMWs? Too heavy; too expensive.
Magic formula: slightly detuned S2000 chassis/drivetrain with seating for four.
I know this issue has come up on this site before: small(ish), light, simple, manual RWD.
Is it REALLY that much to ask for?
…
As for misplaced pie-size speedometers? I’m not bothered. Speedometers are overrated anyway! The speedo in my ’74 911 hasn’t been connected for over a year (blueprinted transmission’s fault!), and I don’t really miss it.
Why oh why god of all things automotive can’t we have a rear wheel drive coupe that seats four–cramped is okay,
Because cramped would be an understatement. Between the longitudinal powertrain, driveline hump and rear suspension, the space is negligible at best.
Sit in an AE86 Corolla versus the front-drive AE82 and this should be apparent. Rear-drive, front-engine cars lose between ten a twenty percent of the interior volume versus a front-driver at the same power levels.
–weighs under 2,800 lbs, handles like a 3 series, has power enough to get you in to trouble with dummy switch off, gets good mileage (20/26 or better feels good), and doesn’t feel like a cheap toy inside–something a 40-something adult with kids wouldn’t be embarrassed to be in.
Good luck with that. The closest car that meets that requirement is the RX-8, which still comes in heavier than that despite having an engine the size of a football, worse mileage and hardly any interior space. What you’re asking is either impossible, or insanely expensive.
Even cheap ways of doing this, such as disconnecting the front differential of an SX-4 or Impreza result in a car that still has a space/mass/cost deficit versus an equivalent front driver. What you’re describing is an aluminum- or carbon-fibre-bodied 1-Series (which still has a useless back seat). Think about what that would cost.
I think someone could, potentially, make a rear-engine, rear-drive car that meets most of these specs. It’d still cost a fortune, would have zero trunk space, and would subject rookie drivers to 911-style snap oversteer. So then maybe not.
“The closest car that meets that requirement is the RX-8, which still comes in heavier than that despite having an engine the size of a football, worse mileage and hardly any interior space. ”
I’m 6’2″ and I sat in the front of an RX-8 and then got into the back seat without adjusting it, and I was quite comfortable. Your other points are right on, but I have to disagree about the interior space of that car. It also has almost no torque and a poor reliability record, which is really a shame because other than those two issues it’s pretty awesome IMO.
“But it’s Front Wheel Drive”
Because it always has been, and always will be. The original Mini was the first car to use a transversely mounted engine with front wheel drive configuration.
Oh c’mon, for anyone that’s every driven the original Mini, these things are porkers. How could they not been, when the original was 1500 pounds and this is a 1000 pounds more. The original Mini was inertia-less and got 40 MPG no matter how hard you flogged it…but I suppose if you’re used to a Dodge Charger….
The only problems with the original Mini was that
a) it was a 10′ crush zone, b) a bit small, but who cares and c) the engine/tranny was 1950s tech and correspondingly inefficient and breakable.
There’s a nice conversion kit for stuffing a big Honda mill in them, and a) problem with c) above go away and b) you are faster than spit.
The original Mini: you don’t drive it, you wear it, and it’s one of the original babe magnets: they squeal when they see it. 5’x10′
One of the more delightful things in racing is to watch a mixed class race between a full-race Mini and buncha muscle cars, Corvettes, what have you. If there are any turns to speak of, the Minis go screaming through the corners inside of the muscle-bound hulks and are half-way down the straight before the monsters catch up again…then, at the next corner it all repeats. The crowd goes wild, eats it up and cheers for the Mini…who is having a hell of a lot of fun and the hulks get surly at being made the fool.
Please stop drooling over the new MINI, it’s so declasse.
Because cramped would be an understatement. Between the longitudinal powertrain, driveline hump and rear suspension, the space is negligible at best.
Relative to a Mini chassis size you mean?
Good luck with that…What you’re asking is either impossible, or insanely expensive.
Your point’s well-taken. Maybe it’s asking too much for such a car to weigh under 2,800 and have the fuel figures I asked for.
Or is it? My reference point here are the BMW E30 coupes, whose wheelbases were 4″ longer than the Mini’s, and had true rear seats–no more cramped I’d say than the Mini–with front engines, RWD, and weights averaging around 2,800 lbs. A ’90-’91 325i was 2,811 lbs.
I know that builders must meet a host of more involved regulations to federalize cars these days, and that equals weight, but as far as dimensional packaging, I’m not sure it can’t be done.
I know I’ve read it somewhere on this site; a column by one of the regulars (RF?) arguing for a no-frills front-engine RWD coupe (sedan?) that actually seats 4 (unlike a 911, but maybe like a Mini, in which I once spent 5 hours in the back and it was okay), is light, agile, modestly economical, and reasonably priced. That means cutting junk drivers don’t actually need: sunroofs, over-complicated “climate-control,” electronic seats, misc. luxuries, too much sound-proofing and upholstery, automatic transmissions, giant stereos, navigation, design features which necessitate otherwise extraneous metalwork, etc.
The reduction in features could lower cost, and lower weight, thereby making the car both more fun to drive, and more fuel efficient. Couple what I would call modestly austere feature sets to a good, modern motor (VAG 2.0TFSI for example; 200hp, 26mpg combined in an A3), put it in a light, stiff chassis, cover the damn interior with a respectable surface, and you’d have a winner.
Because it always has been, and always will be.
Yes I know. My point wasn’t so much about the Mini per se, as it was about the dearth of light, front-engine, RWD coupes.
FWIW, I had great fun driving my friend’s Mini in 1988 around the back roads of Somerset. And Stewart’s dead right about how much fun they are to watch at the track.
I know that builders must meet a host of more involved regulations to federalize cars these days, and that equals weight, but as far as dimensional packaging, I’m not sure it can’t be done.
Oh, it can be done, but it is very, very costly. When you have cars like the Civic and Corolla approaching 3000lbs, a rear-driver of the same size with a decent powertrain is nigh-impossible for a reasonable price. The 1-Series and RX-8 are as close as anyone has gotten, and they’re not close at all. Your example of the E30 (or my AE86) aren’t valid because neither car stands a chance at meeting modern crash standards, and both are cramped, heavy and expensive next to their contemporary front-drive competition (the Integra and GTI, for example)
The new Mini is light, safe, fast, (relatively) spacious and somewhat cheap because it’s a front-driver.
That means cutting junk drivers don’t actually need: sunroofs, over-complicated “climate-control,” electronic seats, misc. luxuries, too much sound-proofing and upholstery, automatic transmissions, giant stereos, navigation, design features which necessitate otherwise extraneous metalwork, etc.
None of what you mention really contributes much to the mass of a car, except soundproofing and the transmission, both of which would result in the car being labelled a noisy niche box. You might save fifty pounds at most, and you’d have a car that hardly anyone wants to buy, but still cost a bundle to make.
The mass (and expense) is in the platform, and that’s needed both to make a car safe, and to make it achieve modern ride and handling standards. That we have economy cars that can pull skidpad numbers better than sports sedans of a decade ago and crash better than fullsizers has a lot to do with that mass.
(VAG 2.0TFSI for example; 200hp, 26mpg combined in an A3)
That’s European mileage figures, which are incredibly optimistic. Most cars lose a good 10-15% when they face EPA or real-world testing.
Look, I think you’re right that a rear-drive four-seater that got good mileage would be wonderful, but what you’re asking is not doable at a price that people would be willing to pay. You’d either need to decontent it to the point where only gearheads would want it, or price it somewhere that only the rich could afford it. If it were doable, Mazda or BMW would have done it already.
OK I don’t know if anyone is paying attention to this but…
“None of what you mention really contributes much to the mass of a car, except soundproofing and the transmission, both of which would result in the car being labelled a noisy niche box.”
A sunroof alone may weigh upwards of 40 pounds. Power seats maybe 30 pounds each. Bigger wheels will weigh more, and wheels have been getting bigger and bigger over time. Whether you consider that contributing much is a matter of opinion, but extras can certainly add up to a deal more than 50 pounds. I think you’re right though that safety is the biggest factor in the higher weight of modern cars.
Is it just me or is the Mini quality lacking? I went for several long rides in my buddy’s new Clubman and I couldn’t get past how flimsy everything felt. From the interior bits to the doors and rear hatch I was afraid that I was going break something. Compared to the Mini, my 03 WRX is built like a vault.
“Compared to the Mini, my 03 WRX is built like a vault.”
Because it is a vault. At a 500 lb premium over a comparable MCS. I’ll take the weight savings of a few plastic bits any day. How it gets through the corners is more important to me than how the door handle feels.
@Ferrygeist
A ‘90-’91 325i was 2,811 lbs.
A 123d is over 3000 lbs, but it matches all the other criteria and gets 35 mpg when driven like a maniac.