Car Respect--Geo Metro
I'm not actually going to write a Car Lust for a Geo Metro, simply because it doesn't generate lust for me. I have a lot of respect for the Metro, but as we can see in other walks of life, respect does not always equal lust. My respect for the Metro is a purely intellectual response; the only real emotion the Metro prompts in me is a slight tinge of ennui.
(Note that this isn't really true of the Metro's predecessor, the Chevy Sprint--its turbocharged variant will be appearing in this space someday as a bona fide Car Lust.)
Yet the Metro, in its own way, was as superlative as any Porsche, as extreme a performer in its sphere as any Ferrari. Its forte? Providing maximum fuel economy and usefulness for the minimum price. Within that context, the Metro was the ne plus ultra.
There has been a lot of conversation lately about alternative-fuel cars, hybrids, electric cars, hydrogen-fueled cars, Smart cars, and the like--all very cool developments, all interesting additions to the automotive world. Then fellow Amazon blogger Rich Sloan blogged about his friend's Smart fortwo--and subsequently got roasted in the comments for saying that his friend's fuel costs were $0 after 142 miles.
All of this really puts into context just how amazing the Geo Metro was--or, possibly, that we just haven't made much progress on fuel economy in the last decade. I like both the Smart and the Prius--there's something gadgety about them that appeals to me--but if your goal is just to have a useful gas-sipping car, it would be hard to do better than a Geo Metro.
| Geo Metro | Smart fortwo | Toyota Prius | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Displacement (L) | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.5 |
| Cylinders | 3 | 3 | 4 |
| Engine Configuration | Inline | Inline | Inline |
| EPA City (MPG) | 46 | 33 (40)* | 48 |
| EPA Highway (MPG) | 49 | 41 (45)* | 45 |
| Horsepower | 55 | 70 | 76 (143)** |
| 0-60 (seconds) | 12.7 | 14.4 | 9.7 |
| Cargo Volume (cu. ft.) | 29.1 | 12.0 | 14.4 |
| Front Headroom (cu. ft.) | 37.8 | 39.7 | 39.1 |
| Front Legroom (cu. ft.) | 42.4 | 41.2 | 41.9 |
| Weight (lb.) | 1,650 | 1,808 | 2,932 |
| Price | $875 | $11,590 | $21,100 |
* The parenthetical fuel economy numbers are from 2007; the non-parenthetical fuel economy numbers are the 2008 numbers.
** The parenthetical horsepower for the Prius is the combination of the gasoline engine and the electric motor.
The Smart specs came from the Smart website, the Toyota specs came from the Toyota website, and the Metro specs came from this site. The 0-60 times are from a variety of sources, and the Metro price was based on the cheapest Metro I could find in my metro (ha!) area. There is one oddity in the numbers above--I think Toyota is dramatically underrating the Prius' cargo space, perhaps by only quoting it with the rear seats up. There's no way a Metro has more than twice the Prius' cargo volume.
Nevertheless, as a well-rounded urban warrior, the old Metro aquits itself pretty well against today's flashiest high-mileage stars. The Metro can do everything the Smart can do, but more quickly and more efficiently--if less stylishly. The Metro is smaller and slower than a Prius, but not by a lot--and it matches the Prius' mileague. Considering the fact that hybrids tend to under-perform their EPA rankings, the Metro may actually be more efficient.
Some--I'm looking at you here, Mochi Mochi--would argue that a Honda CRX HF was even more impressive, since it combined otherworldly fuel economy numbers with most of the driving fun of the rest of the CRX line, and they'd be right. Used CRX HFs are somewhat rare, though--my point with the Metro is that extraordinary fuel mileage is easy to find and doesn't require a fancy new car.
Thanks to Flickr user mikeg626 (based on his handle, possibly a Mazda fan?)--these are images of his old Metro.
--Chris H.
Dzo on April 24, 2008 at 08:05 PM
Hi,
Exhaustive Info
Thanks
Dzo
http://www.getbestcars.com
YoYo on May 14, 2008 at 03:34 PM
I remeber buying a brand new black coupe 2 door Geo Metro 15 years ago. I loved it! I would fill the tank and this would last at least two weeks. Believe me, I drove everywhere!This car was great even during the winter. I was able to drive myself out of deep snow.I only had to change the car battery twice in 12 years and never had to take this to the mechanic for any major problems. Just for oil change etc. Of course, people would make fun that I was driving this and drool over their SUV's. Unfortunately, 2 years ago the GEO started having problems and I finally decided to trade this in for a Nissan Altima. Big mistake. What a gas guzzler! This monster takes at least $50.00 a week and I don't go anywhere for this reason.
Boy, do I miss the GEO!
AllenS on May 16, 2008 at 11:37 AM
I bought my GEO Metro in 1997. I have 168,000 on it, and it's running great. For whatever reason, it seems to eat exhaust systems up. Had to replace the brakes a couple of times, and the alternator once. It cost $8500 with no radio. I've done all of the work on the car, and I wish I had a brand new one.
Gabriel Hanna on May 16, 2008 at 11:45 AM
Funny how when people talk about Big Oil's huge profits, they don't mention the government's taxes, which are a much larger fraction of the pump price--and the government didn't pump that oil, or refine it for you, or get it to the gas station.
Governmetn never seems interested in a "windfall profits" tax on itself.
This is from the California energy commission:
http://www.energy.ca.gov/gasoline/margins/index.html
If you read their tables, you will see that the bulk of the cost of gasoline is the cost of crude oil. The governments, state and Federal, take more in taxes than what the oil company takes in markup.
For example, see March 3, 2008. The cost of a gallon was $3.46. $2.44 paid for the crude oil. Of the remaining $1.02, $0.64 went to state, local, and Federal taxes and fees.
This left a whopping $0.38 to pay for marketing, refining, distribution, and profits.
Mike on May 16, 2008 at 12:10 PM
I drove teh Sprint from '94 through '02. I paid $4200 and managed to unload it for $1800, granted I'd had quite a few things fixed over the years. I had the 5 speed standard, and it could actually accelerate pretty well on a flat surface if you were willing to punch it hard. The standard shift + front wheel drive also made it a respectable car in the snow (with a decent set of tires). For a college kid it was a great car - gas was cheap, parts are pretty cheap and I could haul most of my stuff to the dorm in one load. Not really following car science closely, I really did not know that a similar car today would have to weight about 750lb more just for the crash protection, but I guess that's why we don't see a similar car being produced today.
JohnMc on May 16, 2008 at 12:14 PM
Well my wife has a 2001 Geo and it runs like a top. We bought it used with 20k on it and now have 91k. Other than the usual maintenance items this car just runs and runs. If you turn off the air and run it at at about 50mph its not hard to get 40-45mpg on flat terrain. To bad they stopped production. It is a damn good car.
Some Guy on May 16, 2008 at 12:22 PM
If the Metro inspires you to Respek, you must worship the 1981 VW Diesel Rabbit as a god.
FIFTY MILES PER GALLON.
Rick C on May 16, 2008 at 12:31 PM
"The most frequent response I get from people when they find out I like teeny tiny light gas-sipping cars is that teeny tiny light cars would get flattened in an accident."
Well, there's a reason for that. I could show you a picture of a Ford Focus that got teeboned by an F-350, and had most of the passenger side bashed in about a foot, which was fatal to one of the occupants.
John Z. on May 16, 2008 at 01:20 PM
I have bittersweet memories of my Metro. When my wife got the family car in the divorce, that little 3 cylinder Chevy was all I could afford. I loved it and hated it. But what a car! It regularly got 50 miles to the gallon on the highway. That's double what I get today in my much bigger and much more comfortable ride. But how I would love to cut my gasoline bill in half right now!
John Z. on May 16, 2008 at 01:28 PM
"I could show you a picture of a Ford Focus that got teeboned by an F-350, and had most of the passenger side bashed in about a foot, which was fatal to one of the occupants."
What's your point? I could show you a picture of a motorcycle that got hit by a Ford Festiva. Not much left of the motorcycle driver either.
Mike on May 16, 2008 at 01:42 PM
These new snall cars look like they would do well in a crash into a block of concrete - a saw a videoof the SmartCar and it looked like an intact roll cage surronded by flattended soda cans (ie the rest of the car). My concern is the Chevvy Suburban that practically runs you over and then pushes you backwards for 50 yards.
SFC B on May 16, 2008 at 02:10 PM
As a motorcycle rider I find people who whine about the safety of a small car to be, well, silly. "It's too small to be safe" is simply someone's irrational justification for not wanting to buy a small car. If the vehicle that hits you is large enough, and going fast enough, it's going to ruin your day. SUVs are not even the "apex predator" in the jungles of the highway. An 18-wheeler travelling at highways speeds will turn most anything else into something resembling a modern art piece.
Mike from NVA on May 16, 2008 at 02:51 PM
It's about time someone showed some respect for those of us who own a Geo Metro. I bought mine new back in 1996 and it just hit 100k miles. Paid $9000 new. Only problems have been that the AC gave out about 5 years ago and have had to replace the exhaust system a couple of times. I used to take a lot of grief since I am an executive in a large IT company...but not so much lately since the price of gas has gone up so much.
Even though Blue Book is below $1000, I believe the market price is actually higher now. Anybody have any recent transactions?
Paul ADK on May 16, 2008 at 05:45 PM
We had the original 4X4 Geo Tracker 2 door hardtop. I loved it. That little bugger would go anywhere up here in the woods, turned on a dime, and consistently delivered something like 32 mpg. If they were still building them, I would buy one in a heartbeat.
Casey on May 16, 2008 at 10:11 PM
Mochi is dead-on with respect to profit margins. Companies just don't make that much on cheaper cars; I've even been told that by insiders such as former salesmen.
The Festiva has been mentioned, but not discussed. I had a Festiva for a while, and got 45 MPG without breaking a sweat. In fact, one week I was helping out at another store which involved going an extra 16 miles out, then 16 miles back over and above my usual distance. At 50 cents/mile I was getting $16 gas money every shift, in a car that make 1 1/2 trips on a gallon of gas! What a racket. :)
It wasn't quick, but it was fairly nimble; good head and leg room, and about as much hatchback space as a smaller Civic. Looked dorky as all get-out, though... Heh.
I had an '87 Civic Si hatchback for several years; the regular 3-door, not the CRX. In fact I traded in a '91 Hyundai with 45K miles to get an '87 Civic with 65K miles, and the older Civic proved to be a far superior car. I still miss that l'il puppy, even though I like my '92 Integra (4-door LS).
The Si was sporty enough that I got pretty cocky at times, snaking around cars that would probably smoke me on a straight, flat road. The Si averaged around 33-35 overall, while my Integra usually scores around 30 overall. Not too bad for 120K miles...
I think we should junk most of the more-heinous safety requirements such as all-around air bags, etc, in favor more simpler, smaller cars. Heck, I think we should allow VW to produce the original Beetle again. It's the difference between reasonably safe, and mindlessly safe.
james on May 17, 2008 at 08:56 AM
my 1990 crx hf got over 50mpg when i was a kid and beating the hell out of it...and it looks good unlike the metro. ;P
Glenn on May 19, 2008 at 10:44 AM
I have owned 3 Geo Metros--all sedans and 4 cylnder models, mainly because I needed the extra interior room--and can testify that they are great little cars and very economical, even with the extra cylnder. One of my Metros, a 1997 model, I bought for $300. It already had 247,000 miles on it and a fair amount of rust, but, hey, for the price, I had a friend repair and repaint the body and then drove it another 35,000 miles before the RF A-frame finally gave out. (Crumbled from rust. Alas!.) Six years ago I bought my first Geo, a 1996 model, which then had only 69,000 miles on it. I'm still driving it--now with 204,000 miles, going strong, and still VERY little rust anywhere. This one is a 5-speed (my other two were automatics). I almost always average 40 mpg, no matter how I drive it--and have occasionally managed over 50 mpg on straight highway driving. Love it! My third Metro (another 1996 model), I bought about a year ago, with just 70,000 miles and virtually no rust (still true). Even my two automatic models averaged 32-34 mpg and managed 40 mpg or a bit more on highway driving. An interesting aside is that power steering (which is helpful even on this small of a car) was almost universal on the 1995-1997 Metros (sedans, at least), but is almost (or totally??) non-existent on the later model Metros (1998-2001).
I did own one other car (actually, two of them--a 5-dr. hatchback and a 4-dr. sedan) that was even more miserly on gas than the Metro. It was the 1981-1985 version of the Mazda GLC (I had a 1981 and a 1985 model.) The hatchback/sedan models were front wheel drive 4 cylinders. There was also a rear wheel drive station wagon--but I never owned one of those, so can't comment there. The 5-speed models I drove averaged about 45 mpg and often exceeded 50 mpg on the highway. The weak point of those cars was that they were much more prone to rust than the Metros are. But they were definitely "Great Little Cars." Unlike the "newer" Metros, however, the old GLC's are virtually unobtainable now--haven't seen one on e-bay or elsewhere for years. I presume their bodies have all rotted away, leaving behind "great little" engines that might otherwise have run forever!
Thus, as others have observed, the technology is certainly "out there" to produce great mileage economy cars. No question about it!
dumpstadiva on May 20, 2008 at 04:57 PM
I spied a newly painted raspberry pink (original color) convertible on a trip to Kansas City a couple of years ago and had to have it. It had 50K original miles and a top and interior in great condition.
This little car gets 42 mpg's and lots of compliments. I've never had such a fun car to drive. The gas was just starting to go up then and I am so glad I bought it. They just did a segment on the Tulsa news tonight about the Geo being in demand now. I'm keepin'
it!!!
TG on May 21, 2008 at 12:33 PM
As small as they are, they are still safe. I had (wish I still had) a 94 Metro. Had a rollover accident with it and walked away from it!
Dave on May 21, 2008 at 11:48 PM
Another vote for the Ford Festiva. An ugly, noisy deathtrap, but really fun to drive and I averaged 50mpg back when I drove one.
By the way, I've never been to this site before, but I like it very much and I'm bookmarking it for future browsing.
LO on June 05, 2008 at 05:33 PM
Yeah, a 96 Geo Metro was my first car and drove it for years. My friends all gave me grief and called it a pop can. I finally sold it to my sister who needed a car for $250. She drove it another 50k and thrashed it and now it just sits in her driveway. Whenever I see somebody driving on of these little things around I miss it.
jazi on June 11, 2008 at 02:20 PM
Geo Metro XFi - 53MPG CITY/ 58MPG HWY. XFi's have better gas mileage than all other Geo Metro models. Own one. Love it.
bill j on July 26, 2008 at 02:17 PM
I have 2 metro convertibles (one's a sort of parts car) and just got a '92 4-door metro at an auction. I paid $750 for it (couldn't start it at the dwi auction) and it smoked. My experience with the metro convertible has been very positive. Anyway, I thought the metro hardtop would be more versatile. I took the plugs out after I bought it and the #2 cyl was fouled. I replaced the plugs, but knew I'd have to do something about the engine. So this week I took it to a machine shop where they also r&r the engines. It's going to cost about $2000 to rebuild the engine. I've detailed the interior but it's still going to need three door handles and my wife wants a new windshield put in it. But I drive 300 miles round trip to our houseboat almost every weekend, so it will pay for itself. And ebayers and those on craigslist are getting very good prices for these.
I also have, in storage, a '77 Honda cvcc which I think gets very good mileage. I have had a CRX which got 45-50 mpg but not as much utility. When I was much younger I had some renault dauphines but gas prices then were such that I didn't know or care what their mpg was. And, my first and only new car, a '68 triumpg gt6 probably got good mpg. I still have it in storage, not having driven it since 1972, so it has 20k+ miles on it.
But hey, even my '91 lebaron 'vert gets about 30 mpg on the highway.
Nealr on August 02, 2008 at 06:44 PM
I just bought a 1994 Geo Metro of Ebay for $4140.00. The guy I got it from loves Geo's and took great care of my new car. The car is on the basic aide and is a little noisy. It drives nice and can turn a corner. But the best part is $7.50 for 102 miles.
theregoesmydrivingrecord on August 26, 2008 at 09:56 PM
OK, my driving record is fine, but it is tempting to drive my 1996 LSi 1.3L Geo Metro 5sp 2Dr Hatchback as if it were a classic Porche 912 or something - with the obvious differences. I bought mine at 142k mi in great shape. Slapped new touring tires on it and hubcaps and it's respectable as a basic gas-sipper alright, I get 35/46, which decreases if I get on it, or factor in all those other standard things.
But I think the candy lies in areas that have nothing to with fuel efficiency or economics. It's more fun to drive when you proceed as if you were just handed the keys to a street legal go-kart (DO PLEASE drive responsibly). You can get in and out of parking lots with ease, switch lanes on a dime. If it were much smaller I'd be reminded of the final scenes from the first Toy Story movie. I am a reasonably light dude, and I feel like I have plenty of room in it without needing to take out my truck.
The one notable issue with it is a slap in the face to its front wheel design but also sort of a compliment to this one - Although not fast it is surprisingly peppy. Take it EASY in first if turning, with the FWD you'll break it loose easily on dry clean pavement due to weight transfer. Generally the tires need to be persuaded to wait for the rest of the car. Once you can get the thtrottle in, you can let it go. I find about 5K works best for shifting, past that, it's just wear. Shift gently and slowly, no need to jam the gears, but once the clutch is out you can give it full power OK up to about 5000-5500 rpm or so.
The thing corners surprisingly well. Not like a mad sports car, but it's small - major advantage. Lane position? It's barely wider than a Goldwing. Visibility as you can imagine is superb.
Babe appeal... well, right after I bought it I started dating a dancer, but that's another topic. Ironically she loved the car - no joke. But realisticly, it just simply looks like a small compact car. If you car, paint it or at least wax it and get it nice wheels tires and hubcaps. The statement is obvious - Given the gas prices and global warming and all, the damn thing is laughable yet at the same time a bit cool. They are currently selling for a bit over blue book.
Downsides? Aside from cool factors, it's not fancy, it is loud - it lets road noise through when going fast so get a good sound system. Manual windows annoy some - yet most can easily reach both while driving. High beams are easily activated inadvertently. It's arguably less safe but with front and passenger airbags and 4 shoulder harness belts it's not bad. But this ignores the most important safety factor of all - THE DRIVER.
Suggestions? Get some good tires for your kind of driving and run them up to full recommended pressure unless conditions dictate lower and check often. With the Metros this stuff makes a bigger diff. Consider low-rolling-resistance tires - Google it. Remember to take extra weight out of the car.
I'd love to hear honest high real-world mileage reports. Peace Out.