Last post on Aug 22, 2012 at 10:55 AM
You are in the Chevrolet Metro/Geo Metro
What is this discussion about?
Geo Metro, Chevrolet Metro, Hatchback
#1 of 1864 TheLorax
Nov 11, 1998 (8:22 pm)
I'm in the market for a hatchback and looking for
owner experiences to go by. I like the mileage on
the Metro hatchback. I'm hoping that the way low
pricing (another great feature) doesn't mean that
the thing's more trouble than the savings.
Give me some good news, folx. Or warn me away.
Nov 24, 1998 (5:33 am)
I've driven and been a passenger in one. Works just fine. High mileage. Very reliable - even the smallest 1.0 liter engine. My former co-worker has remarked many times how inexpensive it is to own. Fits anywhere. His commute is on secondary roads not on a rat-race dog-eat-dog highway like Route 128 in MA though.
Dec 10, 1998 (5:51 pm)
The engines aren't very powerful, but they are supposed to be ultra reliable.
#4 of 1864 Seagull
Jan 21, 1999 (7:11 pm)
Also posted in topic #132:
I owned a 4-door '92 Metro hatchback for over 6 years and 88,000 miles. They sip fuel, are easy to park, make great commuter cars in-town, do well on medium-length trips (4-5 hours or less) and will probably never be stolen or broken in to. But, they have absolutely no power, and you have to remember at all times that it is a car for _defensive drivers_: you absolutely do not want to get into an accident while driving one.
As long as you keep regular service up, they are pretty reliable ('92 and earlier Metros do have an issue with their A/C coolant, though, in that it is no longer available...if you loose your coolant for whatever reason, you need to spend $$$ to retrofit the A/C system) and relatively trouble-free. Just make sure you stay on top of your service, though: they do not tolerate "neglect" very well, and can quickly develop chronic problems as a result, much more readily than more expensive (and more quality) vehicles.
If you do opt for a Metro, though, I _strongly_ recommend the 4-door. It is 4 inches longer, and the hatch is more "vertical" than the 2-door, giving you lots more storage space. Contrary to popular belief, you can cram a lot of stuff into a 4-dr Metro hatchback with the seats down including
a bale of hay, mid-size chairs, 27" televisions not the buses-- and half of a college dormroom...I did all of these in my old Metro with room to spare).
#5 of 1864 soukup
Mar 02, 1999 (11:38 pm)
I own a 94 Metro LXI and commute 45 miles one way to work. I've got a lot of miles on it (104,000) and have not had a major problem with the vehicle.
Service it has needed has been a new muffler, rear bearings and the window on the drivers side not going up and down easily.
The big thing I have found with this car is to keep up on the basic oil change, tune up program.
I know I'm not going to get a lot for this on a trade in, and plan on keeping it till it pushes up weeds in the garden.
I get razzed about this car, but as I told one friend, "at least I can pass a gas pump!"
#6 of 1864 alex travanti
Apr 30, 1999 (3:04 pm)
Not many Metro entheusiasts, are there?
Well, then I am one of the few. I just got a new 99 Metro a month ago, which since the 98 model has the Chevy logo rather than the Geo. It's a beautiful dark metallic green, which makes it look like an insect. And for less than half the price of a new VW Beetle, it's just as cute.
It's a perfect city car, gets an amazing 41 mpg. Even with sky-high L.A. gas prices I can fill up for $10 and go over 400 miles without a drop of fuel. However, the tiny 3 cylinder, 55 horsepower engine has a hell of a time going uphill. When climbing a mountain, the best thing to do is downshift, get in the far right lane and just let people go around you.
The car is the perfect size for parking, even parallel is easy. But it can fit a lot in it with the back seat down. I'm a film student and I fit a betacam case, a miller tripod, a light package and all the trimming with room left to fill in the back. It's also very reliable, probably the most reliable among American cars. While it's often true that American cars (namely Ford and Dodge) have a tendency to burn themselves out after 3 years, cars like the metro with such a small engine don't have nearly the potential to do the same. My aunt the very first metro model to come out, the '89, and it lasted great through six or seven years and two accidents (the only reason she lost it was because she let my cousin drive it and he got it impounded through a run-in with the cops).
To address the metro's safety: Most people think bvecause the car is so small it's a death trap. Well, if you're in a serious accident most compact cars aren't going to do a whole lot to save your skin, but the Metro does have dual airbags and a steel safety cage with "self-sacrificing" design. Plus, the 99 model has a new and improved extra-tall bumper. Trust me, this a huge asset. My girlfriend was in an accident the other day in the metro, one of those 4-car chain reaction rear-enders, and after getting hit from behind by a honda at 15mph, the bumper was only scartched up and dented a little. The bumper is so big that the body wasn't touched at all. So now it's as simple as slapping on a new bumper (which the other party's insurance will pay for, of course).
So, all in all, I think the metro is great car. And itsets you apart from the Honda Civic hatchback mainstream.
#7 of 1864 carlady
Apr 30, 1999 (8:01 pm)
You've moved me closer to being a believer, alext! I saw a 99 Metro drive past me last night and I did think it looked cuter than I recalled. And yes, parking would be a dream!
Jun 06, 1999 (5:51 am)
I own a 95 metro sedan because as a college student, it was all i could afford. it is much sturdier than i thought...i was rear ended by a huge pontiac grand am....not a scratch on the metro, the front of the pontiac looked like an accordion. HOWEVER....and a big however....while traveling on the causewy bridge in new orleans, la, which is a 24 mile long bridge over a lake, i was traveling at 55 mph (the speed limit) when i hit a slick patch on the bridge. the car lost control because the tires are so small, and i was spun on the bridge in oncoming traffic three times completely around and landed facing traffic int the wrong lane. not a scratch on the car, but i was so shaken couldn't drive it for weeks afterward. Needless to say, it has also given me a multitude of mechanical problems, and yes, i feel like i am driving a death trap. Come January, my husband and I are ditching it as fast as we can and investing in a big, giant, SUV.
#9 of 1864 alex travanti
Jun 06, 1999 (9:54 pm)
Well, the issue with the tires is very real. I recently got into an accident in my 99 metro hatchback. It was very dark and raining, which in LA is very bad because since it rains infrequently throughout the year the road becomes very slick. I was going about 35 mph on a slightly downward hill when a minivan in front of me stopped very quickly at a yellow light. I slammed on the brakes, which did stop the wheels, but not the car. Because the car is so lightweight and has such tiny wheels, the car kept sliding, right into the minivan. I was pretty much unhurt, except for being a little sore from the seat belt, and the minivan wasn't even scratched, but the front of my metro was bashed in. No damage to the headlight, just the hood and the front bumper. Thank good for the foot of space between the grill and the radiator! I took it to my body shop and their estimate is over $4000 (!!!), which is almost half the price of the car. Fortunately I have full coverage and a $500 deductible, so it'll only cost me the five hundred.
But this brings up an important safety issue about the metro's wheel size. The stock wheels are only 13" by about 6" at the most. I am seriously considering buying new rims and tires after my car gets out of the shop, not only for looks but to add more weight and a fatter, meaterier wheel on the car. Pep Boys is offereing a deal on a set of no-name brand 14" x 7" wheels for about $600 total (including installation and balancing). Anybody out there have any other suggestions for making my metro better at handling the road?
#10 of 1864 carlady
Jun 06, 1999 (10:41 pm)
Before you think about getting new wheels, you might want to put your money into the best possible *tires* for your current wheels. Other small cars have the same size (or smaller) wheels so I'm inclined to think it is your tires that could use a bump up.
What do others think?