From MINI2 News: Gert Hildebrand – MINI Chief Designer Answers Your Questions (http://www.mini2.com/forum/../article445-gert-hildebrand-mini-chief-designer-answers-your-questions.html)

Discuss away.

:)

Due to a delay on our part getting questions in, and delays at MINIs end it turned out we couldn't get illustrated answers as originally promised, but I think the answers speak for themselves generally without need for further illustration.

is it too late to ask him about traveller door s :)

Hopefully that will lead to another new set of questions to fire at someone. :D

why are the mini desginers so obsessed with the hex plastic grille? its not exactly a revolution in design :confused:

its great that we get the chance to question peope like this but the answers aren't particularly illuminating sadly

its great that we get the chance to question peope like this but the answers aren't particularly illuminating sadly
I was thinking that.:(

He answers like a politician, not an engineer.

I'd really like to see design sketches which didnt make it into production for the R56.

not exactly insightful, to be expected really.

His hands will be tied by the corporate bigwigs when it comes to interviews like this.

Shame really. :(

Is it just me, or did he actually say just about nothing of any real significance? :confused: :confused:

Ian

I feel it's a real shame it was not illustrated as planned as I thought that was a brilliant idea, and as they say "a picture paints a thousand words".

It took some time getting in questions (although there was no deadline) as it took longer than expected over Christmas to get suitable questions to put forward regarding design, but the answers took two and half months to arrive, so I was expecting (as was proposed), pictures.

For a comparison, Frank Stephenson Q&A from 2001: 16th May 2001: Your questions answered by Frank Stephenson (http://www.mini2.com/forum/../article33-your-questions-answered-by-frank-stephenson.html)

Being an engineer, and knowing how marketing departments work, I have a strong hunch that these answers came from someone in sales and marketing rather than engineering!

Being an engineer, and knowing how marketing departments work, I have a strong hunch that these answers came from someone in sales and marketing rather than engineering!

I agree, especially when you compare his answers to those of Frank Stephensons in the earlier link. Just a load of sales blah.....:(

I've met Gert Hildebrand a few times on launches and he is very "corporate" and quite cagey in his discussions with the media in general, always has been.

He does have a twinkle in his eyes, and you can tell he enjoys being questions by the media, especially about future products, it's like a game. He has a clever way of talking and talking (and being entertaining too), but not actually saying anything. A seasoned professional.

Pretty dissapointing but not surprising at all. German companies, after all, are not known to admit mistakes or faults in public. Why should this be the case with the R56 controversial design cues?

I am afraid that while Gert Hildebrand remains as head of MINI design, the car will continue to evolve into yet another cookie cutter subcompact, victim of its own success whose destiny will be dictated by accountants and marketeers, not passionate engineers and enthusiastic customers.

Anyone want to begin a petition to bring back Frank Stephenson to MINI?

Evidently, Mr. Hildebrand is a seasoned expert at this:

http://i81.photobucket.com/albums/j240/Gumsandals/LookImDancing.gif

I've learnt more about MINIs from MINI2'ers on MINI2:p Plus they speak with genuine passion for this much-loved car:rolleyes:

Are you sure he's not a BMW accountant, Paul?:p

Mini always had 2 problems with the R56 development -

first off, the first car seemed so perfect - I cant think of much that I would change about the R53 apart from perhaps fuel economy. Everything else was already bloody good. Lets be truely honest here - without being 'bashing' to the new car, but I cant see any of the changes actually being for the better styling wise on the new car. Its all OK, but none is better, even the interior. yes, quality is probably improved, but not design....

Secondly, some changes had to be made, for both the sake of the product development and longevity, and also those changes forced on by regulations - crash, pedestrian, fuel emmisions etc etc....

So given these 2 factors, I think its not really surprising that the R56 doesnt seem to feel the 'love' that the R53 got before it. Its undoubdtly a better car, but unfortunatly, I find myslef not actually wanting one when I see it. However, a really nicely specced up R53 still rings all my bells in terms of desirability.

Odd.

I think MINI's accountants were never happy with the development and manufacturing costs incurred with the R53. Perhaps as early as 2002, MINI already had signaled their desire to lower production costs, move away from the TRITEC engine (Which represented a huge conflict of interest as the powerplants were outsourced from arch-rival Daimler Chrysler) and generally, inject further BMWiness into the car and disect any "Roverness"left in the car. Remember that the R53 design came out of the troubled and short lived marriage between BMW and Rover in the mid 1990's.

Design and powertrain work on the R56 began almost immediately after the R50/53 had been launched in the US. When Frank Stephenson left MINI design in 2002, Gert Hildebrand took over and the R56 work began almost right away.

It is undeniable that BMW took huge risks with the original New MINI. Their were chartering unknown territory with what was perceived until then, a very niche product.

The MINI became an overnight success and it is said that BMW recovered most, if not all, original development costs within 2 years of the car's global launch. The R53 was making a lot of money to the BMW group, but the cost/profit margins were still not were BMW wanted them to be in despite of the old car having had met and exceed all previously set sales forecasts, pre-launch in '01.

This is why the R56 is a design of compromises in many respects. It is a better car, sure it is, but it just doesn't have the aura and "pull"the R53 had. BMW is making a lot of money with the R56 due to its lowered production costs and higher profit margins built into the product. It is a win-win situation from where they stand.

But deep down the tubes at BMW's headquarters in Munich, they know that this car has been diluted and cheapened more than they would have envisioned. I am sure that most of the BMW brass would have expect hordes of R50/53 trading in their "Stephenson"MINIs for the "Hildebrand/design comittee"R56 MINI. That is not happening as much as they had wanted to. Instead, the R56 has proven to be a polarizing design, which has aliniated some of the loyal customers from the previous generation, while making a greater emphasis into bringing "new blood"to the lines from customers that liked the idea of having a MINI but would not put up with the "rough edges"and the more true-to-the-classic feeling of the outgoing car.

To me the R56 was designed primarely for Americans that cringed and balked at the rough edges of the previous car. Now I can have a small BMW shaped in the likeness and image of a MINI...BINGO!

Were ALL the questions you put forward answered or were some tactfully omitted ?

Were ALL the questions you put forward answered or were some tactfully omitted ?

Lookign at the original thread, there were some very "pointed"questions, so I would think it was the latter.

Were ALL the questions you put forward answered or were some tactfully omitted ?

All but one actually, as I could only put in 10, and some that were suggested were just plain not acceptable (were points or accusations, not questions), and many were not design related at all!

This is the one that's got lost in translation somewhere.

"Why are the black wheel arch trim lines (front and back) now not on the shut lines like before?"

totally avoided some of those questions, pants :(

totally avoided some of those questions, pants :(

At least we did get some information from MINI, I suppose it is better than nothing :) Although i woul dhave preffered the answers to be a bit more detailed and more engineering based.

Shame, i think he must of taken a Corporate PR Pill for them answers.

Nothing particularly exciting about his answers.

However Frank Stephenson seemed much more open and honest in his answers.

One question in particular i thought was 'dancing around the question':

"What was the motivation behind removing the C pillar wrap around glass?

To further enhance the aerodynamics on the new MINI we created this innovative solution using a split mounted rear cladding with an aerodynamic edge."

**Snooze**

To be fair, I think Range Rover had that "split mounted rear cladding with an aerodynamic edge" quite a while before the MINI.

The more I read it the more worried I get for the future of the brand........

The responses seem so clinical & convey no real passion for the product!

Can anyone please tell me what on earth he is talking about when he says:

"Typical for MINI is the formal language of the exterior design which embraces the human body archetypes"

Am I being thick, or is he just so terribly, terribly clever that he comes from a very different world to the one that I inhabit? :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused:

Or is this just a load of b******t??

Ian

Or is this just a load of b******t??
Ooh - I didnt realise that B******T was one of the censored words on here ?
But you`re correct - Its a Pile of Big Wee / Poo written by an Adman / Accountant
:o

Can anyone please tell me what on earth he is talking about when he says:

"Typical for MINI is the formal language of the exterior design which embraces the human body archetypes"

Am I being thick, or is he just so terribly, terribly clever that he comes from a very different world to the one that I inhabit? :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused:

Or is this just a load of b******t??

Ian
what it means is that the car has influences from the human form, such as the rear corners acting like male shoulders giving it a masculine look, yet other areas have female influences so that the design appeals to both male and female, so kind of covering the sporty look, but retains its cute side;)

what it means is that the car has influences from the human form, such as the rear corners acting like male shoulders giving it a masculine look, yet other areas have female influences so that the design appeals to both male and female, so kind of covering the sporty look, but retains its cute side;)

Nice one Rakey - didn't realise you were fluent in marketing bo***x speak ;) :p

I think it was Geri Hildebonkers who we met at the MINI2 R56 preview event and even then I thought he was talking cobblers. How anyone could prattle on so enthusiastically about a nasty plastic panel "which apes the grille of the original mini blah blah" is beyond me. As the weeks pass and I see more and more R56s on the road I can't help thinking how much they've got it wrong. Those headlights :eek: The flabbiness of the profile :eek: Those even larger black wheelarches (probably the only dodgy point of the original) :eek: That aerokit :eek: :eek: :eek: That fake scoop - need I go on :rolleyes:

As for improvements in build quality - just ask Mikey of his opinion of the build quality once you take the interior to bits ;)

There was an interesting point in an earlier post about the R56 being designed to satisy the Americans who didn't like the "rough" edges of the R53. Sadly I feel this is exactly the case (although not just aimed at Americans). The (perceived) improvements in build quality, the added refinement, the dilution of engine character (according to BMW, lots of owners complained about the whinning of the supercharger :confused: ) have, in my opinion, resulted in a MINI that misses the point.

If I want to spend my £20K on a fast hatch that is refined, spacious, comfortable, dare I say it, grown up, I'll buy a Golf GTI thank you very much and do it properly. A MINI doesn't need to be these things. The character of the chassis, interior, engine; the potential for customisation - that's what made the R53 so special, and outweighed the need for the Golf GTI-ness.

I so wanted to like the new New MINI - and would happily have been a worthy repeat customer for years to come. But I won't buy a R56. For now, my GTT fettled R53 is still my perfect hot hatch. Of course, if I really grow up sometime soon I might have to swap it for a Golf :eek:

Shame really :(

Spot on comments, Colink.