+ Reply to Thread
Results 31 to 40 of 84
02-17-2008 09:17 PM #31
I am a 49 year old male, and
I am a 49 year old male, and I really like Metros! I had a new 94 Xfi, and used convertible. I still have a used 97 1.3L that I drive eveyday. I just picked up a 99 1.0L Chevy Metro. I also have a HD Silverado that only gets 12-13mpg. My big block Metro gets 33mpg, two and a half times better then the truck. We usually take a big vacation across country at least once a year with truck and camper. Driveing the Metros lets me justify big gas guzzeling trips.
02-25-2008 07:25 AM #32
we have 2 geos. a 95 and a
we have 2 geos. a 95 and a 97. love them both. we like to go for drives and these little cars make it possible without spending a lot of money. only one problem. the 97 had a new timing belt on it when we bought it. but it kept slipping off the pulley on top and got tore up, so replaced it. but the new one is doing the same thing. any ideas what could be causing this problem?
03-07-2008 10:16 PM #33
My first Metro was the
My first Metro was the four-door Geo - I bought it in 1993, just after I got out of the Military & traded in a 2-door Dodge Daytona Turbo on it - everyone said I was crazy & yeah, since I was no longer in Germany, I wasn't driving at 120 miles an hour any more, barely ran at 90 if I pushed the car, but I regularly got 50+ MPG, no matter how fast i drove the car, which is why I just don't understand the furor over the Prius, which uses the same amount of gas, is twice as expensive and may very well need to have it's batteries replaced every ten years (for $4,000?). I drove that Geo like a go-kart and loved it. My buddy later convinced me to trade it in on a Mustang - what a mistake. Hated the gas mileage and problems I had with it, plus the payments! It hurt to go from $125 a month to $330! Ended up trading it in on a car for my wife, but then I finally broke down and bought myself a new Chevy Metro Lsi - I so loved that car! Much improved interior, power, accessories and if you didn't know it used to be a Geo, it fit right in with all the other sedans on the road. Not as great of gas mileage, but constantly in the 42+ MPG range - once again, drove it like a go-kart and with the 4-cylinder engine, I could drive through the desert in Nevada at 85-90 MPH all day long, with the air conditioner running. (both were manual transmissions). My wife hated the car's color - which, if any of you had a Scuba Blue Metro - you know everyone else thinks it is purple! I sold it to my son and he promptly wrecked it and then sold it. I've since driven a Toyota Corolla (nice - sort of a larger version of the Metro - 30 MPG) an Acura RSX - very quick, very nice, also 30 MPG - and now a Toyota Camry - slightly older car (2001) low miles and bigger interior, but still not as good as the Metro. If you gave me a choice between a 42 MPG Chevy Metro like the one I had and a Toyota Corolla for the same price now, I would be hard pressed to decide between them & many people just swear by the Toyota brand. Cut the price on the Metro by $2,000 (or even $1,000) under the Toyota and I wouldn't even think about it twice. Have any of you seen the new Smart Car - the ForTwo? Worse gas mileage than a Metro, smaller than a Metro, Uglier than a Metro and yet more expensive than a fully-loaded Lsi - what the what?
03-29-2008 03:52 AM #34
Metros: Take a licken and
Metros: Take a licken and keep on ticken! I bought my first Metro new in 93. It was a five door (including hatch back). It had over 250,000 miles on it when it died. My son totaled it out twice. The five door could hall an amazing amount of stuff and it didn't effect the mileage that much. I carried 6- 2x10's 16 ft long in it once by folding down the front passenger seat and sticking them through the hatch. Tires even today are under $20. I had a small junk yard of Metros for a while to keep a couple of daily drivers running, but they all finally rusted to crap here in NW Wisconsin. One of these days I'm going to fly to California, Arizona, or where ever, to buy one rust free and drive it back home. So 15 years later our tecknowledgy hasn't progressed enough to get an American car even close to the same economy? (except for a 4 times the price hybred) There is something wrong. Suzuki: Bring back the Metro! Someone may say they were more poluting. Do you believe they are really more poluting than some big gas sucking SUV? And believe me, a few more pounds of safety stuff wouldn't reduce the mileage that much. Maybe if people quit driving around 5,000 lb POS SUV's, with one person in them, Metro drivers would be safer.
04-04-2008 10:10 AM #35
The Geo Metro is one of the
The Geo Metro is one of the best cars ever made in this country. Mine has over 300,000 miles on it and I still average over 50 MPG! If you can find one in good condition, snatch it up and don't sell it (they're in high demand right now with $4 gallon gas on the way this summer, and there aren't too many left on the road).
That said, if you go to buy one, make sure you have a mechanic do an evaluation before you commit. Do not, I repeat, DO NOT buy a Geo Metro on EBAY or over the internet!!! Many Metros had a serious rust problem in the undercarriage that literally rendered the cars inoperable (this is especially the case in the early models, 89-94). There are many dishonest folks online as we speak looking to prey on the public and the need for good MPG; they are putting Metros that should be sitting in a salvage yard for sale online. Don't do business with anyone who won't let you take the Metro for an inspection, and don't offer money up front without seeing the car in person, no matter how much you might want to. Geo Metros are great if they've been well taken care of, but the ones that haven't been are JUNK. The Metro tended to be used and abused more than most cars since the cheap cost and quick depreciation made it seem like a "disposable car", so be very careful when you go to buy one.
04-28-2008 12:29 AM #36
Have a 1999 Chevy Metro I
Have a 1999 Chevy Metro I bought used a few years ago in Daytona with about 30-40K miles on itfor $3000.00. It has over 90K miles on it at the moment, has been all avoer the state of Florida on the interstates mixing it up with the monsters of the freeway. Love the car. I replaced it when I sold off my 2000 Honda Civic hatchback, and found this hatchback as a smaller downsized replacement.
Both cars had 5 speeds transmissions, the honda had a 1.6 liter 4, the Metro a 1.0 liter 3 engine.
Difference in gas mileage is remarkable. Gas tank sizes were different though, the Honda held more than 10 gals. Other difference between the Civic and the Metro is the RPM range of peak torque.
The Honda RPM band was 3000 and up, anything under resulted in nothing happening when the gas pedal was floored. Had to downshift to bring up the rpms to get the car to move. The opposite is true for the Metro. Its built, and cammed (camshaft) for low RPM driving and shifting - which is perfect for gas economy. I even have that little green arrow Upshift light which I no longer need - I can tell when it's time for shifting by engine sound alone, I'm so used to the car.
While the Honda had all the electrical mirrors, power steering, etc, etc,; the Metro is a BASE model, which means it has no power anything but brakes. Manual rollup windows, no clock or radio or speakers. Just 3 gauges on the dash. Max RPM for this little motor I think is around 5000rpm, but I wouldn't take it up there - for long, as it's not meant for it. Get a little valve float, break a valve spring, and drop a valve down into a piston and you need a new engine.
The Speedo on my car max's out at 85mpg. I'm sure the little car could pull that speed in top gear with just a single driver inside. Adding 4 extra people and their weight to this car makes a BIG difference in performance.
I've had a shed fly on top of it during the 2004 hurricane season; a granny smack me in the back bumper while at my sons school (no less, in the pickup lane), and just been adding gas and changing oil and filters to date. The car has made much more for me in terms of income that it has cost over the years. With 90K miles on it, I can tell the CV joints and halfshafts need changing, the rubber hoses and belts as well, and it has used up most of the tires. My main concern is the clutch plate.
I ran my Civic up to 150K miles on the original clutch plate and rubber enginer timing belt. Stretched my luck to the limit. I sold the car rather than pay a dealer to change the plate. Had a distribitor go back on me in that Honda while pumping gas. Pulled up to the station. Shut it off, filled the tank.
Cranked it up, and it fired on one cylinder then died. After that it just wouldn't fire a sprark no matter how much cranking I did. That was the SECOND Honda product that did this to me at around the 150K mark.
Between the 1.6 of the Honda, and the 1.0 of the Metro/Suzuki, There is a large gap in performance, and thus gas mileage for only .6 of a liter. More RPMS in a higher useable band mean more combustion events per second which directly relates to fuel economy. Lower weight combined with smaller enginer which is build and designed to pull a car at a lower RPM is the fuel miser champ.
The trade offs are numerous - safety, survivability in a collision, to much heat coming in from all that window glass and a tiny tiny TINY small AC system which pulls the little motor down and barely makes it a drivable car full of people when its turned on are just a few things one has to put up with.
The flip side is the big grin I get passing all those gas stations reading $3.50-$4.00/gallon prices.
This is coming from a guy who has a CDL-A tractor trailer license, and used to own and drive a 1972 Plymouth Road Runner with a 1969 440 engine I put in it; with a 4 speed and a Posi rear axle - no power anything, no AC, massive torque to burn tires of the car, and got about 6-8 mpg; probably a little less when I spun that big mountain motor to 6000rpm. Premium gas only.
Metro Mike - always looking around for a second one as a backup and parts car.
1999 Hatchback - maybe an auto transmission.
05-10-2008 04:42 AM #37
I still have the 1993 Geo
I still have the 1993 Geo Metro that I bought new. I've never had a bit of trouble with it, I get about 50mpg and will drive this thing until it finally gives up the ghost.
WHY ON EARTH DON'T THEY MAKE THESE ANYMORE?
Is it because they don't make enough money on them.
Well DUH...you aren't making any money on the SUV's that are sitting on the lots today!!!
BRING BACK THE METRO! They'd Sell Like Hot Cakes!
05-11-2008 01:21 PM #38
I too believe Chevy needs to
I too believe Chevy needs to bring Metro Back. But lets face the facts. Big Oil has Big Money. They invest their money in all kinds of things, including car companies. If Chey is one of them the metro is gone for ever. Them Greedy oil companies are the blame. They dont want these cars out there.
05-21-2008 07:33 AM #39
I had a 1996 Geo (3
I had a 1996 Geo (3 cylinder) and it was a wonderful car. When I purchased the car it got 52 MPG and when I sold it 140,000 miles later it still got 52 MPG. The worst part was that I really tortued this car. I changed the oil every 20 to 24 K miles weather it needed it or not. When I sold the car it still had the original breaks. I never checked the oil in this car not once did I pull the dip stick. It is crazy that chevy will not do another run on this car considering the current price of fuel. For fun on the weekend I go to dealerships (US Cars Only) and specify that I have a set of specifications that must be met before I can make a purchase. The principal requirement being that the car must have an EPA rating above 40. So far no takers.
05-27-2008 11:24 PM #40
Consider the Civic hybrid or
Consider the Civic hybrid or Prius
Next year, VW will release Jetta and Rabiit TDi models that should do very well
What's wrong with Foreign cars?
Also, the Metro was actually a Suzuki and made in Canada