Worst design mis-steps
Discussion
Facelifting from this:
to this: (yes, it's still for sale!)
Although it did tidy up the rear:
to this: (yes, it's still for sale!)
Although it did tidy up the rear:
Edited by AppleJuice on Tuesday 20th February 20:05
captain_cynic said:
The problem you've missed is that the Mini is as bigger than other hatchbacks. The original Mini was developed by BMC to be simple, have 80% of the floor space dedicated to the cabin and to be small for UK roads... hence they called it a Mini, not a F**king Great Big Ugly Munter (the name badge would have been wider than the car).
The Mini was designed to be small and practical, modern Maxi's are anything but.
Ok leaving aside that MINI is now a brand name and not a specific model, car names don’t have to be taken literally. I’m sure you’ll agree that a Ford Mustang isn’t actually a horse and an AC Cobra isn’t actually a snake and so on... The Mini was designed to be small and practical, modern Maxi's are anything but.
Those names are meant to be evocative, to invoke the spirt of something else, to imbue an inanimate object with a sense of character. You could choose to view MINI in the same way.
Their entire marketing strategy for the past 17 years has been to capture the spirit of the original by being fun, quirky, unique etc.. they are still generally smaller cars in the grand scheme of things but I can’t remember any BMW MINI campaign trying to claim that they are the smallest thing out there, maybe I’ve misremembered.
It depends on how you want to look at it. I choose not to take the name literally. My view on MINI is that it is a nostalgic homage, a tribute or a reimagining of the original.
swisstoni said:
ash73 said:
l354uge said:
Just seen the new polo, and boy, what an overdesigned, flabby mess vw have created.
Compared to the old one, it's a huge step back.
They look exactly the same.Compared to the old one, it's a huge step back.
24lemons said:
captain_cynic said:
The problem you've missed is that the Mini is as bigger than other hatchbacks. The original Mini was developed by BMC to be simple, have 80% of the floor space dedicated to the cabin and to be small for UK roads... hence they called it a Mini, not a F**king Great Big Ugly Munter (the name badge would have been wider than the car).
The Mini was designed to be small and practical, modern Maxi's are anything but.
Ok leaving aside that MINI is now a brand name and not a specific model, car names don’t have to be taken literally. I’m sure you’ll agree that a Ford Mustang isn’t actually a horse and an AC Cobra isn’t actually a snake and so on... The Mini was designed to be small and practical, modern Maxi's are anything but.
Those names are meant to be evocative, to invoke the spirt of something else, to imbue an inanimate object with a sense of character. You could choose to view MINI in the same way.
Their entire marketing strategy for the past 17 years has been to capture the spirit of the original by being fun, quirky, unique etc.. they are still generally smaller cars in the grand scheme of things but I can’t remember any BMW MINI campaign trying to claim that they are the smallest thing out there, maybe I’ve misremembered.
It depends on how you want to look at it. I choose not to take the name literally. My view on MINI is that it is a nostalgic homage, a tribute or a reimagining of the original.
You have to look on the MINI marque as being a kind of successor to the original BMC range in the 1960s, You have the 3-door Mini (Mini), the 5-door Mini (the 1100) and the Countryman (the Landcrab), all using the same basic engineering and styling in different sizes and with the same distinguishing features.
I'll agree it's a shame that the BMW Minis aren't as clever or as well-packaged as the original, but you can't make a car with the same space/size ratio as the original Mini these days. BMW quite correctly realised that the money was in making it a retro evocation of the Mini's style and character, rather than a direct successor. Rover's 'Spiritual' concept would have been a much truer 'new Mini' but it would never have sold in the same numbers or made anything like as much money. While BMW's decision has kept Plant Oxford humming away at full capacity for nearly 20 years.
2xChevrons said:
And the original Mini wasn't the smallest car on the roads. It was bigger than a Heinkel Kabine or a Bond Minicar, which were the bottom rung of car-based motoring then
Not really, 3 wheelers were cycle-cars and could be driven on a motorcycle licence.Without that, they probably wouldn't even exist. Even a Reliant Robin was bigger than an original Mini.
It's like comparing a motorcycle with a moped. The comparator was probably the far less space-efficient Fiat 500.
Of course, back then, a Mini was a competitor to the Cortina Mk 1, such was its interior space. That was the key selling point, it was greater than the sum of its parts.
The funny thing was that they didn't conform to a mould, like they do these days - you had the Mini, the Imp, the Fiat 500, Renault Dauphine, 2CV and Dyane, same sector, totally different sizes and renditions.
I’m currently driving this. Which I think looks great, but the button to turn the cruise control on is next to the electronic handbrake and then it has the speed controls on the steering wheel. It’s got digital dash too but the only thing you can do with it is a speedo so it’s pointless.
I also think BMW constantly adding and removing LED indicators is pointless. 15 years ago it was ok as they where rare, but to now sell a 50k car without them is stupid.
Fox- said:
Nickbrapp said:
I also think BMW constantly adding and removing LED indicators is pointless. 15 years ago it was ok as they where rare, but to now sell a 50k car without them is stupid.
My 2010 5 Series had LED front indicators. My 2015 5 Series does not. Infuriating.ash73 said:
Nik da Greek said:
Design icon..
Oh, for f
ks sake
I don't dislike the appearance of the new one personally, the problem is the architecture; the engine's in the wrong place and the interior's awful, the dash is about 3' deep.Oh, for f
ks sakeExhibit A: My wife has a New Beetle, and she loves it. Not once has she popped the bonnet to do anything (that's my department). Does she know which wheels are the driven pair? Nope, not a clue. Would she like the car to have the engine in the back? I literally just asked her (no, really, I did!
). Her response was "don't be so stupid, I'm not putting the shopping under the bonnet!"On the extremely deep dash, it's only really noticeable when viewing it side-on. Sitting in the driver's seat, looking forwards, it's not all that much of an issue in reality. Gathers a lot of dust, mind you!
Don't get me wrong, I'm not claiming that an original Beetle isn't an awkward and often unpleasant sod of a thing to drive. Even if it could be somehow bluffed through modern emissions and safety tests (etc) there's no way anyone would buy one. I can fully understand why someone would want the ease of use and lack of maintenance of what is essentially a MkIII Golf in a fat suit.
Just don't see why it had to be dressed up to look like what it's not. I'm sure any number of cutesy styling treatments could have been contrived that didn't look like the homage/interpretation/abortion of the Nu Beetle. I feel the same about MINI and the new Fiat 500 range that's taken over the entire world...
...but the mere fact these three brands have taken over the world maybe just shows what an out-of-touch dinosaur I really am
Though that doesn't stop them from looking st
Just don't see why it had to be dressed up to look like what it's not. I'm sure any number of cutesy styling treatments could have been contrived that didn't look like the homage/interpretation/abortion of the Nu Beetle. I feel the same about MINI and the new Fiat 500 range that's taken over the entire world...
...but the mere fact these three brands have taken over the world maybe just shows what an out-of-touch dinosaur I really am
Though that doesn't stop them from looking st 
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff