2008 Mini Cooper S Convertible Sidewalk Edition John Cooper Works Intake on 2040-cars

Auto blog

2015 Mini John Cooper Works Hardtop First Drive [w/video]

In its previous iteration, the Mini John Cooper Works three-door was a bad little mother. It looked like an engorged puffer fish facing down a shark, sounded like squadron of hornets with even the tiniest provocation of the throttle, and turned corners like it was angry at them. It was hard riding and ill mannered in all sorts of daily driving situations, but supremely satisfying when used in the all-out-attack mode for which it was designed. I dug every minute I spent in one, when really concentrating on driving. (As a commuter or passenger, not so much.) It only took fifteen minutes of driving on the lilting, tree-lined roads outside of New Haven, CT, to realize that the 2015 Mini JCW Hardtop was a lot less pissed off. And with more power, refined ride quality, a better interior, and an available automatic transmission, a lot more suitable for a wide variety of drivers. The little hellion has matured. On that grownup tip, the first of the many '15 JCWs I sampled was fitted with a six-speed automatic transmission. Cue collective shocked gasp. I'll forgive you if you didn't know an auto was going to be available equipment on the JCW, as Mini product planners had to remind me that it had been offered for the first time on the model-year 2013 car. Even then, the manual trans saw an impressive 75-percent take rate, so it's not as if many of the auto-shifters made it to the street. That could change in this new generation, where the 6AT acquits itself quite well. Wheel-mounted paddles offer near immediate response to requested shifts, and programming for the sport setting causes gears to be held up to the top of the tach. The manual is far more engaging, even if the automatic is quicker than the human hand. The six-speed Getrag manual transmission is still the better option, even the car is two-tenths of a second slower to 60 miles per hour with it (6.1 vs. 5.9 seconds), and less fuel efficient in the city (23 vs. 25 miles per gallon). The manual uses a long-levered shifter that still feels positive going between gates, and a short-travel clutch that's got nice weight and an easy catch point. It also offers defeatable rev matching, smoothing out even very aggro downshifts. Mini measures the manual as slower than the auto, but I had a lot more fun using it to harness the increased power of the 2.0-liter turbo four-cylinder engine.

Mini has become the Rover that BMW always wanted

BMW has been working for 20 years to build a successful line of British cars, and on the evidence of the second-generation Mini Clubman, it may have finally done it. That means it's time for all of us to get used to the fact that Minis aren't going to be that small anymore. Case in point is this new Mini Clubman, introduced last month and conspicuous by its size. Many of us who've pointed to BMW's stewardship of Mini as an example of retro done right bemoaned the Countryman subcompact SUV – a concept actually ahead of its time. The Coupe and Roadster, perhaps rightfully, deserved (and received) an eye roll. But now there's a so-called four-door hardtop that went on sale this year and this forthcoming, six-door Clubman that approaches the compact hatchback class in size. These vehicles actually look like practical moves at keeping buyers from defecting to larger cars made by someone else, rather than vain attempts at maximizing investment in a set of parts. And in an interesting twist, Mini is turning into one of its ancestors – minus the feeling of inevitable doom. Many of us were led to believe somewhere since Mini's relaunch about 15 years ago that the brand would be a stepping stone into the greater BMW fold. But in reality, it's done exactly the opposite, creating a parallel brand for those not willing to embrace the BMW image, but leaning heavily on British nostalgia. That was sort of the reasoning used when BMW pulled the Rover Group of England away from a fruitful partnership with Honda in 1994 and absorbed it all. In the consolidate-or-die '90s, it made sense. BMW had a small, but successful, line of sedans. Rover had no success outside of Western Europe (its last US attempt at selling cars, the Sterling, ended three years earlier). Yet its Land Rover line of SUVs was just right for the time and the 35-year-old Mini still had image-conscious clout. With every passing day, the brilliance of BMW's move to abandon Rover in 2000 seems brighter. Even ditching Land Rover made sense in the long run (and probably saved Jaguar in the process). With every passing day, the brilliance of BMW's move to abandon Rover in 2000 seems brighter. During a chat with Mini USA VP David Duncan this summer, it became clear the Mini of the past is probably gone. A small, city-sized Mini is not necessarily off the table, but larger and more profitable models are coming first.

Did BMW drag its feet on Mini recall?

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration is opening an investigation into BMW's reporting of a recall for 30,456 examples of the 2014-2015 Mini Cooper Hardtop, Cooper S, and the 2015 John Cooper Works. According to the government, "it appears from a review of NHTSA's databases that BMW may have failed to submit recall communications to NHTSA in a timely manner." The automaker issued the recall in July because crash tests showed the models didn't meet side impact requirements for passengers in the back seat. While there were no reported injuries at the time, the company decided to install energy-absorbing material in the space between the rear interior panels and the exterior. However, NHTSA has decided to investigate whether this campaign should have started much earlier, given the evidence the company had. According to the government's report, the Cooper Hardtop failed side-impact tests in 2014, although one of these tests was five-miles-per-hour faster than the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard. The agency claims: "In January 2015 BMW verbally committed that it would conduct a service campaign to add padding to the rear side panels of MY 2015 Mini 2 Door Hardtop Cooper models. However, BMW did not initiate the service campaign and failed to inform NHTSA of its failure to do so." A subsequent crash test of an example with this fix showed it to make the vehicle compliant with the rules. Mini spokesperson Mariella Kapsaskis told Autoblog: "Regarding the NHTSA audit query, BMW Group is evaluating the request and will respond to NHTSA as appropriate." INVESTIGATION Subject : BMW Reporting & Timely Recall Execution Date Investigation Opened: SEP 24, 2015 Date Investigation Closed: Open NHTSA Action Number: AQ15004 Component(s): STRUCTURE All Products Associated with this Investigation Vehicle Make Model Model Year(s) MINI COOPER 2014-2015 MINI COOPER S 2014-2015 MINI JOHN COOPER WORKS 2015 Details Manufacturer: BMW of North America, LLC SUMMARY: NHTSA is opening this AQ to better understand and evaluate BMW's process(es) for its notification procedures and for timely and efficient execution of its safety recall campaigns. In mid-2014, NHTSA's New Car Assessment Program (NCAP) had side impact moving deformable barrier (MDB) tests performed on two model year (MY) 2014 Mini 2 Door Hardtop Coopers. These two tests were performed at a speed 5 mph higher than required by Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) 214, Side impact protection.