Classic Mini as DD?

ddavidv wrote: This thread comes up on Mini Mania's message board at least once a year. You may want to do a search over there for more educated opinions.

Agree with the bulk of your post, but not the above quoted part. The minimania board has by and large become a terrible place to get any technical info on minis. Most of the really knowledgeable people have been driven away and the quality of the posts there has degraded so much that I rarely even go there anymore. 5 years ago it was a daily visit. Now maybe monthly. I'd stay away from there or at least take everything you read there with a large handul of salt.

I hope you meant that there are a larger quanitity of educated posts there and not that the posters there are better educated than the ones in this thread.

I have to agree. A couple of years ago, the local Lotus dealer had a late 90's Mini ('71 title) with a 1300 MPI engine. For half a second, I seriously thought about it... except the car didn't come with the a/c option and that's one compromise I'm not willing to accept during a humid NE Summer.

While I love Minis, having driven them some and having extensive experience with a '73 Volvo 1800ES, the Volvo would be a much better daily driver.

Never driven either of these cars but the BMW 1600/2002 seems like a better car for every day use.

Holy crap I didn't realize they were made of gold!

http://sfbay.craigslist.org/eby/cto/2012647604.html

http://sfbay.craigslist.org/pen/cto/2017564501.html

http://sfbay.craigslist.org/eby/cto/2005752314.html

If that first one is a real S (with heritage certificate) it's actually a pretty good deal.

If they want $2k, for that last one, mine is a friggen steal.

Teh E36 M3 wrote: If that first one is a real S (with heritage certificate) it's actually a pretty good deal.

Yep. I usually see asking prices well above $20K for certified Cooper S's.

Decent 'driver' Minis (minimal rust; mutt heritage; glossy 2nd or 3rd paint job) seem to sell for a little under $10k these days. Sometimes more, sometimes less, depending on the engine and overall condtion.

The heritage certificate is not all it's cracked up to be either. My Mini on paper is a 1964 Austin Mini Cooper S. I have the heritage certificate that confirms is. The heritage certificate also states that my car has been reshelled at some point.

I am fairly sure there is little to nothing of my car from 1964 except the vin and the paperwork.

TJ wrote: I hope you meant that there are a larger quanitity of educated posts there and not that the posters there are better educated than the ones in this thread.

Yes, that. I think using the search function is more useful than daily visits. There are a lot of opinionated idiots over there (a certain dark skinned Moke owner comes to mind) but there is good info if you spend a little time sifting for it. I must confess I rarely read it myself any more unless I've got a specific question on something I haven't figured out yet.

alfadriver wrote: More than once, I've considered a classic truck to restore as a towing vehicle- but in all honesty- it won't tow any more than our Edge, it won't be as comfortable, and a bunch of other stuff.

Oh go ahead, take the plunge.

It really isn't that bad, depending on where you have to drive or how far you need to go. I've had few complaints about this setup and have some remedies in mind for some of the annoyances. The one downside is everyone wants to talk to me about the truck...and ignores the car completely!

In reply to ddavidv:

The thing is- I know both of our 4.0l Rangers were better tow vehicles than that, and a while slew of other betterness. And compared to the Ranger, our Edge is SO much better.

I just can't bring myself to be that uncomfortable, with old brakes, poor suspension, questionale A/C, very bad emissions (I remember the smell we had in the 70's.), and just overall experience.

For sure, I don't speak for everyone, but I sure find modern conveiences and qualities worth it.

pres589 wrote: Never driven either of these cars but the BMW 1600/2002 seems like a better car for every day use.

That's one of the things I'm thinking. There's probably more support for them around, and they are more plentiful. A 2002tii is another dream car of mine.

I'm also kicking around the idea of hunting for a relatively unmolested CRX Si. That might be the right answer for a "bucket list" DD car I'd like to own and drive in anger.

The rust and no A/C could be an issue. Of course, I've actually been doing okay without A/C in the Miata, at least now that we're out of the peak summer heat.

Ian F wrote: While I love Minis, having driven them some and having extensive experience with a '73 Volvo 1800ES, the Volvo would be a much better daily driver.

Oooh... I like those too.

Salanis wrote: A 2002tii is another dream car of mine.

Seen this site?

http://2002ad.com/pages/carsforsale.cfm

Might change your mind about the Mini...

alfadriver wrote: In reply to ddavidv: The thing is- I know both of our 4.0l Rangers were better tow vehicles than that, and a while slew of other betterness. And compared to the Ranger, our Edge is SO much better. I just can't bring myself to be that uncomfortable, with old brakes, poor suspension, questionale A/C, very bad emissions (I remember the smell we had in the 70's.), and just overall experience. For sure, I don't speak for everyone, but I sure find modern conveiences and qualities worth it.

As we briefly sway hopelessly off topic...You're not suggesting a Ranger is better than my mighty F100? Because...well, Rangers kind of suck. The other issues: brakes, not really a problem because it's got discs now (bolt-on from a 1979 model). Power is adequate. The axle ratio isn't the greatest for pulling away, but that could be fixed. Rolls at 70 just great. I don't miss a/c because it's got both vent windows and ankle coolers that provide enough cross ventilation I don't ever suffer. No power steering is probably the worst thing about my rig. When I tow, I mostly roll down highways or am only traveling around 2 hours to a track so it's never a real hardship.

I'd be lying though if I didn't confess to looking at the early 2000's Super Dutys and thinking "I gotta get me one of those". The substantial difference in cost to buy, license and insure for something I'd never drive (DD is a company vehicle, so I don't really need another DD truck) is simply too many sets of Toyos to be worth it. And chicks dig the Big Red Effie.

In reply to ddavidv:

Lets see- I had more power (220 to somwhere near 175- unless you modfied the engine), better brakes (yea- my 2003 disks were better- and had ABS), better trans (5 speed auto vs. 4 speed manual or 3 speed auto), and better fuel economy (I bet you tow at about 10mpg, I would get 14.5).

We loved taking that Ranger a long way- one year we did two pulling trips to Florida.

And I'm convinced that my Edge is much nicer.

It's just that taking out some of the betterness- I (as in me, myself, and I trio) just don't think I could put up with the compromises). That's the point I'm trying to make.

Hopefully S will be able to if he goes through with it- I'm sure it will be fun!

Eric

ps- don't need chick do dig the rig- need the wife to dig the rig. She LOVES the Edge so much that she sold her 164.... Which is the other side of the Edge coin....

alfadriver wrote: ps- don't need chick do dig the rig- need the wife to dig the rig.

Good point... I wanted a late 70's Ford p/u... the other-half wanted me to buy the Cummins... guess which one I got... of course, since she still hates the Dodge, I wish I'd held out for the Ford... or just kept and fixed my van and bought a trailer.

Salanis wrote:

pres589 wrote: Never driven either of these cars but the BMW 1600/2002 seems like a better car for every day use.

That's one of the things I'm thinking. There's probably more support for them around, and they are more plentiful. A 2002tii is another dream car of mine.

I have a 2002 and a Mini. They are very different cars. My 2002 is mostly stock and drives surprisingly like a real car for being 25 years old. It is more comfortable than the Mini, has a nice sized trunk, has a more usable backseat. The Mini is way more fun to drive, but it is not stock, so it's a bit of apples and oranges comparison. Both are easy enough to work on and have good dedicated websites with the answers to questions. The BMW still has a dealer network so I could go down to the local dealer and order parts. Haven't come across an Austin dealer in w good while, not even a British Leyland dealer. They both have a cult following and should be easy to re-sell. They both have some racing history. Tii's are relatively rare. I am gathering parts to Megasquirt my '02 to make my own version of a Tii. This week I drove the BMW once, the Miata twice, and the Mini twice to work. Both are good choices - very different, but both good.

In reply to Alfadriver:

We'll agree to disagree. I didn't like either of the Rangers I had, and Fiats are still better values than Alfas, lol. I don't know what the towing mileage is, but I've gotten 15 unladen. It's rated at 208 "old" HP, whatever that translates to. I wouldn't want to drive my F100 to Florida from PA, that I'll grant you. I stick to the vinyl seat. The wind noise is pretty atrocious. It currently has no radio, not that I could hear it anyway over the leaking door seals. But it's paid for, doesn't depreciate, and the wife thinks it's the coolest thing next to the BMW that I own (other chicks dig it, but that's just sort of icing on the cake). It's got a column shifter, so nobody ever asks to borrow it. For me, it's the right tool for the job.

Looked at the Edge, didn't like it near as much as the Taurus X or whatever they called it, but that's just me not being a crossover kind of guy.

On topic: I think if everyone drove Minis the world would be a happier place. But since we don't, I wouldn't drive one every day. Basically an enclosed motorcycle that rusts out from under you. The BMW 1600/2002 is far more practical, but will still rust out from under you. Any old car will come with a list of compromises.

TJ wrote: I have a 2002 and a Mini. They are very different cars. My 2002 is mostly stock and drives surprisingly like a real car for being 25 years old. It is more comfortable than the Mini, has a nice sized trunk, has a more usable backseat. The Mini is way more fun to drive, but it is not stock, so it's a bit of apples and oranges comparison. Both are easy enough to work on and have good dedicated websites with the answers to questions. The BMW still has a dealer network so I could go down to the local dealer and order parts. Haven't come across an Austin dealer in w good while, not even a British Leyland dealer. They both have a cult following and should be easy to re-sell. They both have some racing history. Tii's are relatively rare. I am gathering parts to Megasquirt my '02 to make my own version of a Tii. This week I drove the BMW once, the Miata twice, and the Mini twice to work. Both are good choices - very different, but both good.

So... I currently have a lightly modified Miata that isn't seeing track duty anymore and has become a commuter. I like the idea of getting something else that would put a smile on my face to drive around and be a bit fun and different, but not frustrating.

Would you be more inclined to suggest the Mini or the 2002? Or would you recommend just hanging on to the Miata?

You say the 2002, "...drives surprisingly like a real car." What exactly do you mean? Do you mean the mini doesn't? In what ways is driving a mini not like driving a real car?

IMHO, I would say keep the Miata. Using any classic car as a daily driver may be fun, but will be occasionally more frustrating than a modern car. They simply require more regular attention, regardless of whether you have time/money to deal with it or not.

I drove mine every chance I could (non-cooper, bone stock RHD) and enjoyed every minute of it. But that's because I only drove it when I wanted to. No cooling to speak of, no heat to speak of, my legs are twisted up (only 5'10") but oh man is it fun. It'll be for sale in the spring.......

Salanis wrote:

TJ wrote: I have a 2002 and a Mini. They are very different cars. My 2002 is mostly stock and drives surprisingly like a real car for being 25 years old. It is more comfortable than the Mini, has a nice sized trunk, has a more usable backseat. The Mini is way more fun to drive, but it is not stock, so it's a bit of apples and oranges comparison. Both are easy enough to work on and have good dedicated websites with the answers to questions. The BMW still has a dealer network so I could go down to the local dealer and order parts. Haven't come across an Austin dealer in w good while, not even a British Leyland dealer. They both have a cult following and should be easy to re-sell. They both have some racing history. Tii's are relatively rare. I am gathering parts to Megasquirt my '02 to make my own version of a Tii. This week I drove the BMW once, the Miata twice, and the Mini twice to work. Both are good choices - very different, but both good.

So... I currently have a lightly modified Miata that isn't seeing track duty anymore and has become a commuter. I like the idea of getting something else that would put a smile on my face to drive around and be a bit fun and different, but not frustrating. Would you be more inclined to suggest the Mini or the 2002? Or would you recommend just hanging on to the Miata? You say the 2002, "...drives surprisingly like a real car." What exactly do you mean? Do you mean the mini doesn't? In what ways is driving a mini not like driving a real car?

Can't speak for TJ, and I've never owned a Mini (although I've driven quite a few of my friends' Minis over the years), but..

I've owned about 5 different 2002s. As far as the "real car" comment, I think a lot of the difference is in the gearing (both in the gearbox, and especially in the final drive). The Mini, as wonderful as it is, seems to have been designed for in-town commuting, fuel economy and narrow country roads. The 2002 was designed for the Autobahn. It is much more comfortable at 75-85mph (with the proper wheels/tires, the stock ones are narrow and small) on the Interstate. An 02 is simply designed to do a different job than the Mini. That's why you see so many modified ones. Because the basic design is so competent, we upgraded them as the technology advanced. Better tires. Better seats. Better pad compounds. Bigger radiators. We used to say they were 20 years ahead of their time...about 25 years ago. Even though a modified 02 still goes down the road as well as a modern car, you still have to deal with 60s era ventilation controls. Maintaining working A/C can be a nightmare. And the heat is often nothing better than having an old German woman breathing on your leg (especially if you fit a radiator big enough to run 75mph for hours at a time).

That being said..I will own another one, someday. There's a reason BMW was able to move "upmarket" in the 1980s..every single car they sold was to someone who heard us "lighthouse customers" bragging on our 2002s in the late 70s.

Sorry about being so long-winded, but I have one last thing to say..the environment of your Daily Drive has a lot to do with whether or not to use a classic. At the moment, I'm driving one of my Corrados (the black one, actually..best stinking car I own!) as my DD. I'm scared to death. The car is certainly fast enough, and healthy enough (they guys talking about British cars are right! Once a car is old enough, and sorted out, the initial build quality doesn't matter much) to keep up with and manuver within the traffic, but people here in Atlanta are so agressive that I sweat every stoplight and Left Lane Blocker, wondering if the Marching Moron behind me will get it stopped/slowed before crushing my backside into something the insurance company would consider being "totaled".

If I were DDing in this environment in a real classic, I'd probably skip work six days a week.

The BMW drives like a 'real' car because it pretty much is a car. The Mini is a go kart with a body on it. That makes it fun, but the comfort level isn't high. It's noisy, bouncy, invisible to other drivers...and tons of fun.

The stock seats in a Mini are terrible. Most people install race buckets which aren't much better for comfort. I put Suzuki GTi seats in mine which make it bearable for longer trips. The gearing is more for around town than open highway. At 75, it's absolutely screaming. The intake noise right behind the speedo can get tiring. The clutch takeup is nowhere near Honda smooth. It's a fun toy, but takes a real commitment to live with on a daily basis. I do have a Mini owner friend who drives his 45 minutes to work most every day it's not snowing, but he does all his own work and has a Toyota pickup as a backup.

The 2002 is much more like a normal car. I don't remember the heating being that lackluster. It's certainly more comfortable and has better ergonomics. They do have fussy cooling systems and have been known to poof head gaskets. I've not driven them much on the street but without modern suspension they drive like a car from the 1960s, which is to say they aren't really razor sharp. A new Hyundai Accent handles just as well if not better out of the box.

Any of these desirable old cars (Datsun Z, Volvo, Fiat...doesn't matter) are going to be a practice in tolerance and increased maintenance.

In reply to Salanis:

What they said. I drive the BMW to work about 10 times for every 1 time I drive the Mini. I enjoy the Mini more for the most part, but I wouldn't want to use it everyday. The BMW I would. If I were you and lived in Sacramento, I'd drive up to Auburn, CA and talk to the folks at 7 Enterprises if you are interested in Minis. Check one out and see if you think you'd like it as a DD. I would say if my commute consisted solely of twisty smooth 2 lane roads I'd choose the Mini. If there is interstate driving or lots of bumper to bumper traffic, I'd choose the 2002.