1994 Geo Metro Reviews from North America

1994 Geo Metro Hatchback 1.0 three cylinder

Model year1994
Year of manufacture1994
First year of ownership2007
Most recent year of ownership2012
Engine and transmission 1.0 three cylinder Manual
Performance marks 10 / 10
Reliability marks 10 / 10
Comfort marks 7 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 10 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
9.3 / 10
Distance when acquired186000 miles
Most recent distance233000 miles
Previous carOldsmobile Calais

Summary:

The best kept secret in America is the ultra dependable motor that gets 50 miles per gallon

Faults:

Clutch at 230,000 miles.

CV boot.

Timing belt at 190,000 miles.

Water pump at 200,000 miles.

Driver's side window comes off track. I have to roll it up with 2 hands sometimes.

Hatchback hydraulic arms don't work. If the hatch falls on you, it could kill you. Being held up by a broomstick with a nail in the bottom.

General Comments:

I really love this car! It's dependable, gets 49 MPG, and I annoy the big Texas Oil Companies by owning it.

I have 233,000 miles on my 94 Geo Metro 1.0, and want to set a record for the most miles on a motor if I can.

My Geo starts great every morning. All I do is just bump the key and she's running perfect. I did all the normal stuff like change plugs, wires and rotor. My brakes are simple, I just swap out the front pads every 40K or so. Wal-Mart battery, and if the battery dies, just push the car and jump start it, no problem. I use Valvoline oil conventional, this car loves it.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 23rd April, 2012

24th Apr 2012, 16:43

There is nothing on a Metro that weighs enough to kill you if it falls on you, unless you're a fly.

3rd Oct 2012, 18:36

I could very easily (and vividly) demonstrate how heavy the hatch is on my 1994 Geo Metro, or how heavy the doors are, even if the rest of the car isn't very strong. The hatch missed my head by an inch, the first day I bought the car (used in 2009 with just 48,000 miles on it), not knowing the struts didn't always hold. It is most definitely very, very heavy. You can tell when you try to lift it by hand without the struts or hear the sound it makes when it comes slamming down. $40 for new hatch struts has fixed the problem, and has probably saved one or more serious injuries. NOW it seems as if the hatch is super light. It's very, very misleading.

1994 Geo Metro 4 DR Hatchback 1.0

Model year1994
Year of manufacture1994
First year of ownership2009
Most recent year of ownership2011
Engine and transmission 1.0 Manual
Performance marks 7 / 10
Reliability marks 10 / 10
Comfort marks 6 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 10 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
8.3 / 10
Distance when acquired120000 miles
Most recent distance140000 miles
Previous carDodge Colt Vista

Summary:

Most economical vehicle to repair, maintain and operate ever

Faults:

Purchased car with a burnt exhaust valve. Installed a rebuilt cylinder head, and replaced the timing belt.

Next I replaced the catalytic converter, which was the cause of the burnt valve.

The clutch was worn out and would no longer move the car. Installed a new clutch assembly.

To achieve maximum fuel economy I replaced the wheel bearings.

Then I replaced the brakes, to achieve maximum stopping power.

The driver's seat back would not stay in the upright position, so I replaced the adjuster.

General Comments:

Since the purchase & repair of this car I have only had to spend money on fuel and oil changes.

During the past year my 1994 GEO Metro averaged 46 mpg, and consuming just 7 gallons of fuel per week. This is half of what my economy cars from the 80's use.

Although this is a small car, with a small engine, it still has adequate horsepower, and easily keeps up with traffic at highway speeds.

As a pure transportation vehicle, this is one of the best cars I have owned to date.

This is the type of vehicle that all car companies should have in their inventory.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 9th April, 2011

1994 Geo Metro Base 1.0

Model year1994
Year of manufacture1994
First year of ownership2009
Most recent year of ownership2011
Engine and transmission 1.0 Manual
Performance marks 9 / 10
Reliability marks 10 / 10
Comfort marks 9 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 10 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
9.5 / 10
Distance when acquired112072 miles
Most recent distance117000 miles
Previous carToyota MR2

Summary:

Greatest. Economy. Car. Ever

Faults:

The part you all want to know: MPG.

I have observed, in the real world, 49.89 MPG on the highway, and this is not the XFi model with only 48hp. I have the "big boy" with the 55hp 1.0 3 cylinder engine. The gearbox (when maintained) shifts crisply (though the synchros are about shot, so you have to shift it by ear (not a big deal, no tach anyway). This car is very rewarding to drive, at only 1,600+lbs. It has no ABS, traction control, stability control, airbags, power steering, etc. This is a bare-bones little hatchback.

I curse the feds for making cars so bloated now where we cannot have such fun, bare bones little cars with personality. A damned shame.

It took all of this to get it there:

I got a very neglected car. The tires were low, balding, and needed replacing soon. The oil was black and was over a quart low. The spark plugs were caked white with carbon, but not oily (rings and compression were still good, thankfully). The transmission fluid was also black and low. I flushed both and now change the oil and filter every 1,000 miles. I ran SeaFoam in the gas tank, crankcase, and intake system. A little mechanical empathy goes a long way.

The starter started (ha!) clicking a few months ago, after a year of ownership, so I just replaced it, rather than have it go out at the wrong time. The starter I replaced was the original unit.

The automatic doorlocks (activated with speed) stopped activating a few months ago. The driver's exterior door handle is broken inside the door, I just have been too lazy to replace it. Eventually I will, when I get around to it. As it stands, I just open the passenger door and open the driver's door and then go to the other side of the car. Not Suzuki's fault, as little things do wear out, eventually.

I replaced the water pump (was the original unit, 16+ years of service), timing belt (also original!), valve cover gasket, cam gasket, crankshaft gasket, radiator (precautionary measure), hoses (original!), timing belt (original... did anyone maintain this poor little car before me?!), drive belts, spark plugs, ignition cap, spark plug wires, and the engine light was on when I got the car (replaced the EGR valve).

The guy I bought it from rebuilt the entire brake system, the CV boots up front, tie rods, and the entire suspension and bushings at all four corners. Apparently, changing the fluids was more work than rebuilding the entire brake and suspension systems! I hate it when people neglect cars! He bought it at the height of the gas crisis in 2008 for $3,000. I bought it for $1,300.

Finally, I added a new set of 12 inch Yokohama tires all around, and the car handles great. Sure, it's not a Toyota MR2, but for what it is, it is a lot of fun to drive!!! Get one, but don't get an automatic, not nearly as fun, or frugal on the gas!

All in all, a fantastic little car. If this thing was sold new today, I would buy it, as it offers the best mix of fuel economy, parts availability, handling, low insurance, and I think it looks pretty sharp, as well.

Pity Suzuki doesn't make these for the U.S. any longer. Why can't they get it together?! I want another Swift/Metro, Suzuki!!!

General Comments:

This car is light, frugal, and stone-reliable.

It has buckets of character (3-pot engine).

It is VERY easy to work on and maintain.

It is VERY simple, so few things go wrong.

If/when anything breaks, parts are cheap and abundant.

The interior is BASIC, but well-designed.

The gearbox is crisp and dare I say, "sporty"?

The light weight makes this car very fun-to-drive.

We need more three cylinders, damnit!

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 2nd March, 2011

Average review marks: 7.5 / 10, based on 54 reviews