RE: Shed Of The Week: Rover Metro
Discussion
Ah memories, my first and second cars were Metro's - nice to drive compared with many small cars in the early 80's.
People need to remember that most cars from that time didn't fare well in a crash and that hasn't stopped some from becoming collectors items, a mk1 Escort Mexico will crumple just as well for example. My first was written off in a crash, rear ended at speed by a lorry pushed across the road head-on into a Volvo but I got out with only cuts.
The seller isn't expecting to get £950 reading the advert, £550 would probably get it.
You shouldn't expect each weeks shed to be always a big, powerful German motor.
People need to remember that most cars from that time didn't fare well in a crash and that hasn't stopped some from becoming collectors items, a mk1 Escort Mexico will crumple just as well for example. My first was written off in a crash, rear ended at speed by a lorry pushed across the road head-on into a Volvo but I got out with only cuts.
The seller isn't expecting to get £950 reading the advert, £550 would probably get it.
You shouldn't expect each weeks shed to be always a big, powerful German motor.
Gorbyrev said:
My understanding is that Caterhams are quite good in a crash structurally. Some of your bits are rather exposed and the crumple zones are far from generous. But people walk away from pretty serious racing incidents in Sevens.
Surely any Seven likely to be involved in a "racing incident" is roughly 75% roll cage? I dare say you'd be OK in a Metro if it had a roll cage (it wouldn't go, of course - PWR would be halved...).Edited by Gorbyrev on Friday 24th October 14:01
t driving position. Still better than other stuff around at the time, I'd prefer a Mk3 Escort though.My Mother had a 1984 Black MG Metro, non-turbo version, with red seat belts - something unusual for the time. That went well (for the 80's) but three years in it needed new front wings, a front valence and various under-wing structure repairs. She sold it on after that for a 1.3 Nova SR and that was like night and day in comparison.
J4CKO said:
Pommygranite said:
cookie1600 said:
Pommygranite said:
When it came out What Car gave it a full 5 stars and proclaimed it a class leader...
What Car Azerbaijan?Seriously, when it was launched it was highly regarded. Especially when you considered what the opposition was.
The year before the Metro's launch I was 29 years old and working in Oxford, my daily drive there was 21 miles along the A40 (probably today the worst commute in the country - that's progress for you!).
I like to think my daily driver was not a bore (a Ginetta G15). In those days there were no bloody 4x4s to contest with or worry about, and just as well with the car being the height of a double-decker bus tyre.
Anyway, traveling that morning at in excess of 80 allegedly I still have the memory (pity there were no onboard cameras then or flash mobiles I could have taken pics with) of 3 Metros in that old BL orange blaze colour coming up fast behind me. I didn't know they were Metros, of course. All had headlights on and each passed me approaching the bend just beyond Cassington - at that time it was a 3 lane road if I recall). There were no real hold ups on the road then, even in rush hour traffic it at least 'moved'.
Those 3 Metros were a fabulous sight. That sounds absolutely daft now, but this was a car that was in the news that year 'all the time'. The ragtops were always trying to get an exclusive on it - I think the Sun got the biggest one. Naturally these test cars were nothing like the detuned production model(s). The 3 of them passed me with a consummate ease, although I did my best to keep up behind them on their way to Cowley works.
People really do forget how this car was 'all news'.
It does really look ridiculous now, but this was a time when 'all' cars rotted in front of your eyes. A different age.
But in a lot of respects far better than today's generation who can do nothing but mock, laugh, and jest, so typical of today's culture of vitriol and 'I know best' ...but who, in truth, know bugger all!
Wow. My mum had a 1.1S three door in white back when I was a kid. Fond memories. My mum's was 100% reliable in the three years she owned it before she sold it to my sister's boyfriend and it disintegrated within weeks. Hahaha.
They've not aged well have they. I think people are starting to forget that simple light weight cars can be fun to chuck about despite their power defecit. This would probably offer more of a driving 'experience' than most barges would. That said, I'm not saying I'd buy a metro these days to cruise about in.
They've not aged well have they. I think people are starting to forget that simple light weight cars can be fun to chuck about despite their power defecit. This would probably offer more of a driving 'experience' than most barges would. That said, I'm not saying I'd buy a metro these days to cruise about in.
Al 450 said:
If it's a 1.4 then it's 105hp, 76hp was the 1.1L. Highest specific output of any small engine at the time and for a long time as I recall.
105 bhp was the 1.4 16 valve K series in the GTI, this is the 8 valve, the 1.1 K was 62 bhp.I had a GTI for a bit, mine was a dung heap of a thing though, when new though they were quite capable, my auntie had one and my uncle used to nick it all the time and he is a nutter, upset the drivers of some much more impressive machinery with it, lightweight with 100 odd bhp and a wheel at each corner with a determined nutcase at the wheel is quite a formidable combination.
neil1jnr said:
moskvich427 said:
I'd rather crawl on my hands and knees
I think I'd rather drive it over say a Polo saloon diesel....Poor form...
Anyway, you'd rather drive a Metro over a new-ish Polo? Really? Have you ever owned, or actually been in a Metro?
I heard a story about the powder-coated alloys on the Turbo models. It went along the lines of the surface was so smooth that under heavy braking the tyre itself would slide along the rim. Is this bull?
Several friends had a Metro when we were youths in the early 90's - one even had the Turbo and it wasn't a bad looking car. I can remember never feeling impressed or safe in any of them though. To think someone would still want to buy a second-hand one surprises me.
Several friends had a Metro when we were youths in the early 90's - one even had the Turbo and it wasn't a bad looking car. I can remember never feeling impressed or safe in any of them though. To think someone would still want to buy a second-hand one surprises me.
Zircon said:
How is this any worse than its 1980's rivals:
Renault 5
Citroen Visa
Ford Fiesta (better image admittedly)
VW Derby (ditto above but much more £)
Fiat 126
Nissan Micra
Indeedy. The Fiesta Mk1 facelift (I refuse to call it Mk2) deserves more ridicule - the underpinnings were 13 years old when the car was eventually pensioned off, and the cheap South African steel it was made of rusted before your eyes.Renault 5
Citroen Visa
Ford Fiesta (better image admittedly)
VW Derby (ditto above but much more £)
Fiat 126
Nissan Micra
The metro/R100 only outlived it by a year, and was a more modern design when it came to market in the first place.
Phil303 said:
I heard a story about the powder-coated alloys on the Turbo models. It went along the lines of the surface was so smooth that under heavy braking the tyre itself would slide along the rim. Is this bull?
Yes. Total.Edited by r11co on Friday 24th October 14:42
Glowing over a Metro still, well, well. I'll forgive them in the early cars The original 1300 MG was a fun little thing, but when it spawned the frumpy later cars it lost the spirit IMO. We are talking 1990 with this tepid little rot box with a wheezy A Series!! You could have also had...
or
or
Being there at the time these threads make me smile. We all knew the Metro was crap
or
or
Being there at the time these threads make me smile. We all knew the Metro was crap
Pommygranite said:
Superb collection of old articles there. That'll keep me entertained for weeks. r11co said:
Indeedy. The Fiesta Mk1 facelift (I refuse to call it Mk2) deserves more ridicule - the underpinnings were 13 years old when the car was eventually pensioned off, and the cheap South African steel it was made of rusted before your eyes.
Not so sure about that. Just because tech is old doesn't make it bad. My recent Caterham had very old underpinnings yet was great fun. Also much as my MG Metro MK1 was fun the MK2 Fiesta XR2 was another league. Way quicker, better equipped and styled, superior brakes, gearbox and driving position etc.
KTF said:
Until you hit something or something hits you.
I'm another Metro/100 defender, who speaks from experience.My very first car while I was at university was a then year-old Rover 100, insisted upon by my father who thought a British car would be cheaper to run and fix, and who had fond memories of a Wood & Pickett-tuned MG Metro he'd given my mother in the early 80s. Fortuitously, my 100 was the exact same shade of blue as the one NCAP crash-tested so I benefited hugely from the airing that the crash test got on national TV at the time because it caused my mother to panic about me crashing it and dying, and therefore I was able to persuade my father to let me trade it in for the Mk2 Golf 1.8 that I really wanted instead.
However, whilst the Golf was a cooler car in every possible respect, it wasn't particularly a better steer. I drove all around Europe in my 100 (Germany, Italy, South of France) and whilst no 7-series in terms of motorway comfort, it was a surprisingly fine-handling car on a good backroad, if a little bouncy. Plus, the low power means you drive everywhere flat out, which is quite entertaining. And yes, as someone else mentioned, they are great at handbrake turns!
Occasionally I see a Rover 100 bobbling along in central London, usually in ritzy trim with some elderly woman at the wheel, and think that for £500 it would be a perfectly amusing anti-cool tool for gadding about town. Pretty certain my wife wouldn't agree though...
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff