1993 Rover - Austin Metro 1.1S 1.1

Summary:

Comfortable, reliable and economical

Faults:

So far, this car has been 100% reliable.

I changed the cam-belt for peace of mind and I've replaced the wiper blades.

I didn't have the code for the radio/cassette player, but a local Rover dealer was able to supply it free of charge.

I bought the car with 12 months MoT and all it needed to pass the test was a new exhaust silencer.

General Comments:

Years ago I used to have an old orange Austin Metro (998cc model) and that was everything a first car should be - economical and cheap to insure.

Recently, I needed a commuter car for work and only one small car fitted the bill. My white Rover Metro 1.1S was purchased for less than £1000 with only 32,000 miles on the clock.

Mechanically speaking, the car is only three years old and fires up on the first turn of the key. The last owner took three years to cover 1000 miles, I have done double that in the last two months (including a trip to France and Belgium) and the car has performed faultlessly.

The bodywork is not far off immaculate although the rear wheel arches look as if there may be some rust about to bubble through fairly soon. The S model comes with front air dam, a smart rear spoiler and side rubber strips on the doors.

The interior my car is very dark, but spacious enough and front passengers have ample legroom. The switchgear falls easily to hand and is sensibly laid out. The S model even has a rev. counter.

The car is very economical, but because the fuel tank is so small, range is poor at about 200 miles. The 1.1 litre K series engine is revvy enough, but couldn't be described as "sporty" and has to be worked hard to keep up with larger cars. This seems to contradict the performance look of the car.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 13th December, 2003

1993 Rover - Austin Metro L 1.1 petrol

Summary:

Beautiful little ride, Well done Rover!

Faults:

Brake pipe on one side has corroded.

Timing belt snapped.

Water pump is broken.

Rear wheel arches are rotten.

General Comments:

The best way to describe the car I would say is that it's a very pleasant little thing. The performance is fantastic for a 1.1, I have driven a lot of cars in my time and this has out-performed some of the bigger 1.5's. The interior I thought was very spacious I am 6'2" and 20 stones in weight I have no problem. The car is a fantastic little runabout and is very cheap to buy usually (mine cost me £50 on a J plate). And is recommended for first time buyers/drivers.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 21st September, 2003

1993 Rover - Austin Metro 1.1C 1.1

Summary:

Super little car

Faults:

Has required 4 new tyres, an exhaust pipe, a new headlight bulb and a new heater blower resistor. I put a new battery in 'just in case'. Bit of rust on rear wheel arch as with every other Metro.

General Comments:

Bought it after Autocar and Motor called it the Best Small Car in the World. Has been ultra-reliable. Never broken down or not started. Passes MOT first time every time. Has been to Ireland, France, Germany, Italy, Switzerland, but now just goes to work and back. Very comfortable ride. Only does about 40mpg - I had hoped for a bit more. Only been to a garage for new tyres - resistor and all servicing done by myself - probably why it's so reliable!

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 10th August, 2003

1993 Rover - Austin Metro 100 1.1

Summary:

If you have a good one keep it

Faults:

Well the fuel tank went, then the rear wheel bearings, then the battery and alternator, followed by poor wheel tracking. The back brakes needed new shoes and adjusters 1t 68000 miles. When bought I replaced the exhaust system, but not the catalytic converter. The thermostat blew twice caused by poor fitting.

General Comments:

This is a classic car. Its road holding is excellent and its limitations must be apreciated, its not an e type, but handles well.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 16th December, 2002