1991 Rover - Austin Metro Reviews - Page 3 of 6

1991 Rover - Austin Metro 1.1S 1.1 petrol from UK and Ireland

Year of manufacture1991
First year of ownership2001
Most recent year of ownership2002
Engine and transmission 1.1 petrol Manual
Performance marks 7 / 10
Reliability marks 10 / 10
Comfort marks 6 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 9 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
8.0 / 10
Distance when acquired70000 miles
Most recent distance82000 miles
Previous carCitroen AX

Summary:

A dependable run around

Faults:

I can't actually think of much that went wrong in the year I owned it.

New tyres.

Battery drained in cold weather- recharged every week in winter.

Rear wings slowly rotting away.

Crash safety? A low speed bump folded the front end and made the car a write off, although I was OK.

General Comments:

This car is seriously reliable.

Basic maintenance on this car is simple (oil changes etc)

The 'K' series engine is this cars best point.

All in all this was the best £300 I have ever spent, if I had paid a grand for this car I'd still be happy.

If you need a cheap reliable car- get a Metro, there are plenty of these around.

I estimate that this car cost me £150 in maintenence costs over 12 months, and that was on oil changes, wiper blades and tyres.

The 1.1 is nippy and confident around town, and even feels OK on the motorway.

The ride is lightweight and a little bumpy, but is superior to similar cars like the old Clio and Citroen AX.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 5th September, 2002

1991 Rover - Austin Metro GTi 16v 1.4 from UK and Ireland

Year of manufacture1991
First year of ownership2002
Most recent year of ownership2002
Engine and transmission 1.4 Manual
Performance marks 10 / 10
Reliability marks 9 / 10
Comfort marks 8 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 8 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
8.8 / 10
Distance when acquired51000 miles
Most recent distance55000 miles
Previous carRover - Austin Metro

Summary:

Amazing car and very quick for money

Faults:

The Gearbox. This on early metros is weaker than the later Rover 114 boxes, very easy to change though.

Rear radius arms needed replacing

General Comments:

Arches on these cars always go due to the fact that they are not sealed or coloured on the inside.

These cars are rockets with 0-60 times of 8 seconds on the later GTi 16v metros.

The handling is amazing even more so after lowering.

Fuel economy is good.

Insurance is 13 band which is good considering.

Comfy seats.

Nice driving area.

Roomy for small car.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 9th July, 2002

28th May 2003, 07:24

I would tend to disagree with the car being roomy for a small car. I struggle to fit more than 4 people in mine on a pub run and get constant complaints from rear passengers about the lack of space!

17th Jun 2003, 10:05

Insurance is group 11, not 13. Even so, the performance / insurance ratio is a great deal better than on other cars, eg saxo's, nova's etc. I also disagree with it being comfy for a small car, mine struggles to fit more than 4 and one mate who's 6'3" can't even fit in the back.

10th Dec 2003, 16:43

Considering the size of the car outside I think its pretty roomy and versatile inside, I've had a passenger, a Christmas tree and a fire place in my GTi at the same time! :o)

14th Mar 2004, 17:02

I think the metro GTi is the greatest car I have ever driven its fast, cheap and fairly roomey. Classic.

1991 Rover - Austin Metro C 1.1 petrol from UK and Ireland

Year of manufacture1991
First year of ownership2001
Most recent year of ownership2001
Engine and transmission 1.1 petrol Manual
Performance marks 6 / 10
Reliability marks 9 / 10
Comfort marks 8 / 10
Dealer Service marks 7 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 9 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
7.8 / 10
Distance when acquired98000 miles
Most recent distance103000 miles
Previous carRover - Austin Metro

Summary:

A criminally underrated car

Faults:

Brakes failed but they had suffered years of neglect before I bought the car.

Rust in the floor needed welding.

Apart from that it's been totally dependable.

General Comments:

Amazing power from such a small engine, far nippier than it's rivals.

I am 6 foot 3 and can drive it comfortably, a rarity for a car this size.

Very good fun to drive, good ride and excellent roadholding.

Has no power steering but it doesn't need it.

Brakes could be better.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 21st September, 2001

1991 Rover - Austin Metro GS 1.4 from UK and Ireland

Year of manufacture1991
First year of ownership1999
Most recent year of ownership1999
Engine and transmission 1.4 Manual
Performance marks 6 / 10
Reliability marks 8 / 10
Comfort marks 8 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 8 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
7.5 / 10
Distance when acquired78000 miles
Most recent distance81000 miles

Summary:

Don't buy one!

Faults:

Starter motor.

Central locking.

Bits of the interior are dropping off.

Loads of rust, especially the rear arches.

General Comments:

I only had the Metro as I was learning to drive and it's an experience I wouldn't want to repeat. For some reason the car had leather seats which did make the car smell nice!

It was quicker than I expected and handled well, but the brakes were crap and it had about as much street cred as a mobile skip! I felt like an old man behind the wheel!

The car seemed to rust everywhere and it wasn't that old, sold it as soon as I could and brought a BMW.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? No

Review Date: 5th June, 2001

Average review marks: 7.0 / 10, based on 24 reviews