[Closed] Them new 'Minis', the fat ones

I hated the concept of the BMW Mini as a big cash in, all style over substance and like many others slagged it down at any chance.
The wife has now bought a Mini Cooper S and I'm now forced to eat my words as I sneak another drive in it. They do handle very well, not quite original Mini handling but enough to not need to use the brakes that often. Plenty of go in them to encourage you to rag it at any given chance and that's without using the sport button that firms the suspension and increases throttle response to make it even more addictive.
Mini is no way to describe the car as sat beside my own estate car it stills looks huge. I've not actually seen a Countryman in the flesh so can only imagine how much bigger that is. They are supposed to be bringing out a mini Mini soon accoding to Auto Express which shrinks it down to slightly bigger than the original Mini but with smaller more economical engines too.
Those that haven't driven a new Mini need to before slaggin them off to prevent future mocking from their other halves.

The 7 month wait I had until I got mine would suggest otherwise...

I would suggest it proves my point exactly. Create an image, then under-supply the product when released to make it seem more exclusive.

Sucker!

Oooh, get you two and all your posturing...sure sign of issues again. And the fact that you're talking bollocks and getting all wound up about cars that you'll probably never (be able to afford to) drive. Tell me, what issues have you two got with cute little cars all of a sudden? Is it really that important? Surely it's not. There are other things t worry about aren't there? Or is it that there isn't? Life that mundane for you at the moment?

Able to afford to? Mate, I can have what I like. I have no isses with cute cars (Fiat 500 for example) Plain and boring is just fine. It's just the gopping ones that offend. BTW, I'm not wound up. I'm having a great time!

You'll see one day that I can handle the truth...

Oh really? When? 34th of Never?

Btw, I wasn't calling you a hypocrite PP,

I never said you were. I know Elfin well, I was pointing it out on his behalf

just a bollocks spouter that's all.

That's only an opinion. No more valid than my own

Effin's the hypocrite around here. He does know it, but he's struggling to deal with being called out for it.

What ARE you on?

failed. Failed badly

By what criteria? (Ask Effin if you're not sure what that means, he'll explain it to you)

So, you think I'm thick eh? Jeeze thanks. Been called worse by better . I'll get over it (Sniff)

Oh, and lastly, BY MY CRITERIA.

Molgrips, a Fiat 500 is a rebodied, less aerodynamic Panda with less interior space and a hugely inflated price.

How has that moved on the design of the small car?

So you're saying it's a smaller Panda. Is there something wrong with a car being smaller? Like the Ka, iQ and others it represents a good practical but very small and efficient car. I dunno if you can remember back to the 80s/90s but small cars were just crap for people who couldn't afford big ones. Now they are way way better, and Fiat have contributed to this.

The genuine innovation is the engine.

All this is so funny. Having built a mini van from parts when I was at school and having several minis since I was kinda against the MINI until I drove it. So I have, and have had quite a few, including:

JCW Convertible (Current)
[img] [/img]

Stage1 Sprite (Current)
[img] [/img]

Cooper S (Sold)
[img] [/img]

It's the classic problem with designing a retro car: how do you develop the styling after the initial hype has died down. I don't have a answer, but it's clear that BMW/ Mini cocked it up from the first attempt to do it. I thought the Clubman was a an affront to decency and good taste, but this thing is just an embarrassment to the brand.
The Beetle: looks OK in hard & soft top, but nowhere to go styling-wise.
Fiat 500: Looks great now, but can't think how it could be developed.
Schirocco: Not quite the same as it's not retro enough, so can (& should in my opinion) be developed. Nice front end, but looks like an elephant sat on the rear.

Molgrips, the twin cylinder engine you're so keen on appears to be getting around 30-35 mpg in general use, according to the angry letters sent into the Telegraph motoring section over the last few months.

Still, it'cheap to manufacture, so that's all right.

The 500 takes up the same amount of roadspace as the Panda but has less interior space.
It's a less efficient car, a step backward.

The original 500 looked like it did for engineering reasons. The new one giives you less whilst costing more.
Pretty cynical if you ask me.....

[b]how do you develop the styling after the initial hype has died down.[/b] I don't have a answer, but it's clear that BMW/ Mini cocked it up from the first attempt to do it. I thought the Clubman was a an affront to decency and good taste, but this thing is just an embarrassment to the brand.

Well having owned three, I can comment

Supercharged Cooper S was a riot. Noisy, cramped, sparse interior, brutally fast, insane grip and handling and a joy to drive. However over time it became tiresome. Brilliant for short sharp blasts but longer trips were tiring.

So as I'm growing out of that, they revise the car and replace it with the turbocharged Cooper S. It's no longer noisy with a sparse interior. Still cramped but the brutal speed and insane grip and handling are still there. It's now got a "Sport" button. With it turned off it's a nice litle hot hatch and quite low key. With it turned on, it's insane. The performance is noticeably increased and the handling is much more responsive. So it's a more civilised development of the launch model which I was growing tired of so it's a logical step for me. However after a few years of that I start to have a niggle about the interior space, lack of boot and complete inability to have anyone in the back...

So they bring out the Countryman. Which has the refinement of the previous model, and the speed and handling are still there along with the sport button for those all important B-road excursions, but this time we've got doors in the back and proper legroom for adults to sit in the back. Plus there's a boot! It's not massive but you'll get a couple of small suitcases in there with ease. Now it's a far more practical while still maintaining the fun factor.

It's fun.

Oh and here's a top tip, if you don't like it, don't buy it 😉

Molgrips, the twin cylinder engine you're so keen on appears to be getting around 30-35 mpg in general use

That surprises me somewhat, but I've no idea if it's true or not. However I strongly suspect a bit of intelligent driving could significantly improve on that. Not sure I trust people who write angry letters to the Telegraph 🙂

If the 500 really is the exact same car as a Panda then so what? Just call it a different body style and let the market choose. The fact that lots of people have bought them means it's a success.

After all, what are Fiat meant to do apart from sell cars? Can't see why they're being blamed tbh.

EDIT: Quick google suggests anything from 35mpg when new to 45-50 when run in for the 500 twin air. Disappointing. Sounds a bit like those VW TSI ones where it's possible to get high MPG but rather technically difficult.

The aforementioned sport button makes me drive like a complete twunt.

On the JCW model (not sure about the others) it also does something to the exhaust/ECU so if you sharply accelerate then overrun it does massive backfires (not like the normal overrun popping). Apparently it's intentional, zoze [i]krazy[/i] germans.

The net effect is me sharply accelerating; decelerating, making a loud pop and grinning like an idiot. Fun though.

However I strongly suspect a bit of intelligent driving could significantly improve on that.

The aforementioned sport button makes me drive like a complete twunt.

The 500 has a much better safety record than a panda. Or so I'm informed by Gav at the FIAT dealer.