Radiator fins are wearing away. Car is 10 years old so shouldn't complain.
Minor rust on Rear wheel arch, very common!
Radius arms are going, again very common!
Poor build quality and few safety features. It's not a car that you want to have an accident in!
Steering wheel and dash rattle like hell after 80 mph, but that's half the fun with this car and you feel involved about every part of driving it!
It has very quick pick-up in both 1st and 2rd gear, wheel spinning is possible in 2rd as long as those revs are high.
Had no problems seeing off a 106 GTI who eventually overtook me around a totally blind bend on a busy road, nearly killing himself. Idiot. However, I can understand his frustration, the metro's pace surprised me to!
Not as quick as the VTS, as you need to rev it hard to get the best out of it. Anyway 103 BHP in a small shell gives alot of power to weight. Excellent pull in every gear, seems to want to go faster and faster.
Brakes are good, but could be better.
Steering and handling are good, if far to heavy, this will almost certainly be because I have gone from power steering to NON. Steering in car parks and small spaces is like having a work-out, the clutch is heavy and offers good muscle tone for calf muscles located below back of knee. Steering lightens massiveley after 5 - 10 mph.
The multipoint Injection is faster, considerably, than the single point. Look for 7 cross-spoke on the MPI, also 1991 onwards.
Good gearbox, needs to be shown who is boss!
Suspension is very firm, could be better with springs rather than hydrogas, this would be more forgiving when you dont want a stressfull journey!
Piper-cross Induction gives a sporty note and offers minimal power gains.
Finally - This car is understated, it offers excellent hatchback credential for a dated car (1994) and a even a part-time enthusiast can see where Honda have played their part in the engine design. Be prepared to be shocked, I thought I knew my cars, but the Metro GTI has hidden well from better reports and reviews.
Highly tunable and very reliable K-series engine, just give it a service now-and-then and it won't fail you.
Honda had nothing to do with the K-series. It was developed by a small group of British engineers.
Everyone knows the k series is a Honda engine!!
I own a 1.1l metro and I cannot get enough of the car, well the engine at least, it takes everything I throw at it and gives you more back in performance than you would expect for a 1.1 its had a few minor engine tweaks in particular the carburettor, mixture and timing and the induction flow. It's only a pity that the bodywork is suffering, but on a better note about the body, taking the rear seats and all rear interior trim out helps it's cornering massively. Otherwise if I wasn't looking for safer car I would definitely move on to a Gta.
Search for New and Used Rover - Austin Metros available in the UK
Click here to advertise your car
In relation to above, I wouldn't be sure about the Gti as I think it has lots of potential, but the injection just doesn't suit me plus apparently it has less power than the Gta as most came with a catalytic converter. Does anyone know what to expect from a later Gti? I'm very tempted to use a spare 1.4 to turn it into a weekend or project car??
No way could it beat a 106 GTi!!!
You say it left the 106 but can't beat an VTS? Didn't you know they are practically the same car my friend!!
There is no way it could do the 106 GTi for pace, driveability, or even looks!!
Ooops sorry it can do one thing though and that is rust away, like there is no tommorrow!!
The VTS is about 1/2 a second quicker to 60 than a 106 GTI, I don't know if this is down to weight or gearing or something else, but it is.
Search for New and Used Rover - Austin Metros available in the UK
Click here to advertise your car
I wasn't stating that the VTS is slower, and I don't want to start a silly war or words of who's car is quicker, i just wanted to say that as an overall package the Metro can't beat the 106 GTi.
Anyway the VTS and the 106 GTi, share so much in common that you could call them brothers and sisters!
The shell of the car, engine and lots of other bits are the same, and the reason why the VTS is faster because of the gearing and also because its abit lighter too.
The 106 is the better choice as there are TOO many VTS/VTR's roaming about, and they also hold their value slighly better because of this.
Hope this helps.
Its down to gearing alone... its the exact same engine, but the vts gearing is a very long 2nd gear so it will reach 60.this has the tendancy to bog down when you change to 2nd as the revs are too low really.that's the only reason its slightly quicker to 60 than the gti because the gti needs to change into 3rd.
You should see what happens when you swap the 1.4 for the 1.8 VVC k series!
Note: A Comments RSS Feed is available. New comments appear in the Members Area before the main site