61 replies to this topic

[shnevpayne]

Exactly and a few weeks back I gave a mate a lift in my Mini (he'd never been in a real Mini in his life) and he asked how come everyone wasn't driving about in original Minis as he said it was fantastic. Okay I'd whizzed around a few bends and roundabouts etc prior to him asking, but it's still nice to hear praise from those who know nothing about our favourite little friends or pets or even substitute children?

Yes don't forget a Mini is for life and not just for the fun of it!

I Totally agree, I know when I've ever given a lift to a "Mini Virgin" its a classic case of I want this car, now!

What i would have love to have seen was the ACV30 be brought into real life! Now that was an upgrade that people could see was still a real mini. it looked and acted like a mini but was brought into the modern times and would have been as popular if not more so than the 2001 version that BMW took over from Rover. I very much think it could have been more popular!


Follow the Linky...

Mini ACV30

Attached Files

•  Mini_ACV_30_angle.jpg   94.65K   3 downloads
•  Mini_ACV_30.jpg   89.32K   1 downloads
•  Mini_ACV_30_interior.jpg   101.77K   1 downloads

[roga]

^ The ACV30 was an MG dressed up as a Mini, to be precise an MGF with a 1.8 litre K series engine. One of the guys who worked on the project, Mike Theaker, also developed the Spi and Mpi injection systems then went on to work on Powertrain development for the New MINI.

Whilst I agree with Clarkson on his general point he's actually quite wrong about BMC, Leyland, Rover and the Mini. Yes they didn't develop the car as would have happened anywhere else in the world frankly but they also didn't appreciate quite what an important icon the Mini was and later managements were happy to let the car wither away. Theaker himself has gone on record saying that Rover management in the mid 90s were happy to let the car die with the Spi version as new emissions standards would have killed it. He had already done work himself on the side, in his spare time on what became the Mpi though and when BMW took over they and John Cooper encouraged the change of heart that led to the car surviving another 4 years as the Mpi.

Generally though yes, I think Clarkson is right but often we only appreciate the good things when they are gone whilst ignoring them when they're around and drag our feet when it comes to modernising in other ways. Personally I'd prefer it if we adopted the metric system rather than the silly mix we have these days, I learnt in metric and drive in metric in the continent so I have no problem there. I'd be happy to have Euros in my pocket, well I do have about 100 in my wallet at the moment, I'm often over in the continent and it'd make my life way easier and cheaper frankly. Likewise with driving, I'd be happy enough to get cheaper cars from the European market without the need to switch steering wheels over and I spend enough time driving on the right abroad to be able to move across with no problem at all ... it'll never happen though so don't worry

[taffy1967]

But the original Mini was in the super league with other iconic cars such as the original VW Beetle and the Citroen 2CV.

Plus the original Mini had achieved a hell of a lot of things in it's lifetime, so why change something when it's not really broken and selling very well anyway?

As for not appreciating what an icon the Mini is, well Graham Day the Rover chairman who was appointed during the mid 1980's appreciated the Mini all right and that's why it wasn't axed in 1987. No he worked out that as the tooling was all paid for, it was actually quite a good little earner and not the massive loss maker that everyone now blames it for.

So thanks to his insight and new thinking, it got introduced to the Japanese who went crazy for it and then the Mini Cooper was relaunched during the summer of 1990. It also became Rovers greatest export model too as you can tell from this article that appeared in the February/March 1991 issue of the Mini Cooper Register magazine: -

Edited by taffy1967, 17 May 2009 - 09:54 PM.

[Saxo-Fiesta-Mini]

Hahahaha what a *willy* I went on and left a comment probs gonna make no difference but makes me feel better

[taffy1967]

Hahahaha what a *willy* I went on and left a comment probs gonna make no difference but makes me feel better

Whose a 'willy' and where did you leave a comment to?

[Saxo-Fiesta-Mini]

jezza one and i left a comment on the weblink page aka in comment to jezza article

[taffy1967]

Oh right, well nice one mate.

[taffy1967]

I've also posted a reply now too, although it's not showing up yet?

[roga]

Ahhh, predictable as ever Taffy...

(And if you're the man I think you are you'll know where that misquote comes from )

But the original Mini was in the super league with other iconic cars such as the original VW Beetle and the Citroen 2CV.

Yup, you know that, I know that, a lorra, lorra other people now know that but dear old BL never realised it and neither did a lorra, lorra people at Rover (and I'll wager their parent company BAE didn't give a stuff either way). However you are correct to point to an honourable exception...

As for not appreciating what an icon the Mini is, well Graham Day the Rover chairman who was appointed during the mid 1980's appreciated the Mini all right and that's why it wasn't axed in 1987. No he worked out that as the tooling was all paid for, it was actually quite a good little earner and not the massive loss maker that everyone now blames it for.

Yup Graham day saved it then, quite right but it was set to be axed 9 years later and was saved by John Cooper and another parent company both of whom also realised that it was a lot more than 'just' a car. (As I understand it though you are of the opinion that it might have better that the Mini had been axed around '96?)

So thanks to his insight and new thinking, it got introduced to the Japanese who went crazy for it and then the Mini Cooper was relaunched during the summer of 1990. It also became Rovers greatest export model too as you can tell from this article that appeared in the February/March 1991 issue of the Mini Cooper Register magazine: -

Yup but one honourable exception doesn't negate the main point that most of them failed to get it and the British car industry signally failed to invest or renew it's models properly whether in private or public ownership or whether strikebound or strike free. The French car industry managed to produce the 2CV for example and is still intact, the Italian the 500 and is still intact, why? For one thing they invested and renewed, for another thing the French and Italians actually buy the cars they make, which rather helps. So they don't get overly hung up on old stuff they innovate (Clarkson's point) and as a result produce stuff that people want and buy (perhaps also Clarkson's point although less obvious) and also appreciate what they do have and have managers who do so as well (my point I think!). Frankly if the French and Italians can maintain a car industry there's no reason this country couldn't apart from endemic problems with the way this country views and manages it's products, Clarkson simply used the Mini as an example and it's frankly not a bad one despite the contradictions inherent between what he says in this instance and what he has said in the past.

Plus the original Mini had achieved a hell of a lot of things in it's lifetime, so why change something when it's not really broken and selling very well anyway?

If Issigonis had his way it would have been replaced by the 9X in the late 60s - are you suggesting the great man was wrong in planning to replace the Mini?

Edited by roga, 18 May 2009 - 12:02 AM.

[taffy1967]

Well as things turned out and with the Mini being so very special, yes I'd say replacing it at the end of the 1960's would have been a mistake.

Plus BL couldn't afford, nor wanted to replace it anyway as the project 9X would mean new tooling for starters and they'd have made no greater profit from it than they were currently making from the much loved original Mini.

There's also the fact that if the Mini was such a terrible loss maker, then why didn't BL simply axe it altogether in 1968/69? It was obviously making them money and the company was in profit at the end of the 1960's. But okay the Mini Cooper and Cooper S were killed off so BL didn't have to pay any royalty money to John Cooper, plus hydrolastic suspension was axed so the Mini could be produced much cheaply as a result.

Progress is one thing, but changing or replacing something that isn't broken and is still continuing to sell would be equally wrong.

The trouble with this country is it doesn't shout about it's achievements, be they recent achievements or ones from the recent past. So it's fashionable to criticise everything that was actually good and successful and back in the 1980's even Margaret Thatcher blamed all of Britain's problems on the 1960's.

Yes the 1960's when it really was cool to be British as we had the best music, fashions and of course cars and all the eyes of the world were on us. Well okay London and mainly Carnaby Street and the Kings Road.

Either way it's easy to knock something British that achieved so much, just because it survived for so long and became old fashioned and then very cool again. We shouldn't feel ashamed to be British and we shouldn't be made ashamed to love the Mini because it remained largely unchanged throughout it's long production life.

I honestly feel sorry for kids of the future who probably won't get a chance of driving an original Mini, because pound for pound it's the best car ever made and is great fun to drive at legal speeds, unlike most modern jelly moulds which all look the same.

[taffy1967]

Anyway even if Issigonis had his way and the project 9X Mini was introduced, the company would still have suffered badly during the 1970's thanks to all the industrial action and the lack lustre cars like the Allegro, Marina and Princess etc that made up the rest of the BL range.

The 1980's Maestro and Montego were little better and even the MiniMetro wasn't always put together too well, even though it was built by robots and so it came under serious attack in one episode of Top Gear.

But no I was quite pleased that the Mini got equipped with lots of modern safety features from October 1996, even though it only prolonged it's life for a short time.

Edited by taffy1967, 18 May 2009 - 12:34 AM.

[taffy1967]

Either way Clarkson is wrong on all counts because the Mini wasn't rubbish by 1965 as it was out there bringing home all the trophies in most forms of Motorsport which includes the Monte Carlo Rally outright wins.

Plus all The Beatles were driving about in Minis and so was Mick Jagger and Peter Sellers etc to name but a few.

In fact after a few years of it being something of a flop (due to being too clever and state of the art so even the average Brit regarded it as a gimmick and not to be taken seriously), it wasn't until the mid 1960's that sales really took off in the UK and around the world.

Then there's the fact that the vast majority of motoring journalist road testers gave it nothing but praise throughout it's production life, so were they all wrong too?

Just because an overinflated pratt like Jeremy bigmouth Clarkson vomits up opinions without using what little brain cells he has left after so many years of people sucking up to him, it doesn't mean we should naturally agree with him, or even try and analyse what he said.

He's just a pratt and not worth worrying about.

Edited by taffy1967, 18 May 2009 - 12:43 AM.

[taffy1967]

Yup Graham day saved it then, quite right but it was set to be axed 9 years later and was saved by John Cooper and another parent company both of whom also realised that it was a lot more than 'just' a car.

No the other parent company are just exploiting the name to the fullest extent and nothing more. The real Mini was axed in October 2000 and the hatchback that BMW are now desperately trying to sell only has a name to link it to it's real ancestor.

So it's a bit like buying the brand name like 'The Beatles' or 'Pink Floyd' but having an all new line up that can't perform any of the hits that made them famous in the first place and we're all supposed to accept that new line up anyway as it's actually progress?

No I think some things are best left the way they are, so we can fondly remember and love them for being so special and inspiring.

[Xiao_Bin]

he has nothing agains the mini... he is having a go at the british way of doing things thats all
missleading topic title and I bet most stopped reading at the 3rd paragraph

Edited by Xiao_Bin, 18 May 2009 - 01:56 AM.

[roga]

Yup Graham day saved it then, quite right but it was set to be axed 9 years later and was saved by John Cooper and another parent company both of whom also realised that it was a lot more than 'just' a car.

No the other parent company are just exploiting the name to the fullest extent and nothing more. The real Mini was axed in October 2000 and the hatchback that BMW are now desperately trying to sell only has a name to link it to it's real ancestor.

So it's a bit like buying the brand name like 'The Beatles' or 'Pink Floyd' but having an all new line up that can't perform any of the hits that made them famous in the first place and we're all supposed to accept that new line up anyway as it's actually progress?

No I think some things are best left the way they are, so we can fondly remember and love them for being so special and inspiring.

So leaving aside the 'usual' stuff are you now saying they should have dropped it in '96?

Sorry, but it's a bit unclear!

he has nothing agains the mini... he is having a go at the british way of doing things thats all
missleading topic title and I bet most stopped reading at the 3rd paragraph

Absolutely spot on, it is a trice disingenuous to suggest Clarkson is saying the Mini is like syphilis - that's not the point he's making!

However, I think this kind of comment is indicative of that very attitude he is complaining about:

exploiting the name to the fullest extent and nothing more

I'd suggest Clarkson is saying that this is precisely what is not done by many British companies and if they did they'd have more success. Exploiting a name (or in modern parlance a brand) is what successful global companies do, you only have to go as far as Apple or Google on the net to see such exploitation. This is what provides jobs and prosperity in many companies that trade across the world. It is why Britain has been particularly heavily hit by the credit crunch because it has lost many companies as a result of their inability to do this and has become reliant on sectors such as financial services which do not need to do this and in recent years have even championed worldwide that particular British disease short term planning for short term profits.

Edited by roga, 18 May 2009 - 08:55 AM.