metro based kits

[richie barry]

after watching a car is born i was suprised how many metro based kit cars there were
i thought if your going to build a kit car why base it on a metro you may have a nice engin in it but its still a metro whys the point

help

[Frankthered]

Bear in mind that "A Car is Born" was made in 1999, the market has changed quite a bit since then.

Back in the 90's there were lots of (old) Mini and Metro based kits as the donors were plentiful, rusty, robust and relatively easy to tune. If you're thinking of later (Rover) Metros, bear in mind that Caterham have used the K Series engine for several years (I believe they've stopped now) and of course, the first Elises used the K Series too ...

[richie barry]

i supose but my point is why base a car on a metro when for the same price you could get a seiera or a granada or what ever

[Furyblade_Lee]

Why use a metro over a Sierra or Granada? Well the Metro is front wheel drive which Lends itself perfectly to a mid-engined kitcar like a GTM Libra or indeed a Lotus Elise. It has a VERY light, very tuneable K-series engine which can be had from 80-240 bhp if you throw enough money at it. The metro evolved into the MGTF Trophy, which had amazing AP Racing brakes as standard and a VVC K-Series giving 160bhp with total reliability. The other Sierra or Granada donors are rear-wheel drive with old-school Pinto and V6 engines. Good RWD running gear and brakes. So basically absolutely nothing in common with each other do there is really no direct comparison.

[Steffan]

The A series engine on top of a gearbox and final drive gave a power unit/drive combination in 1959 that was revolutionary in size, output and space saving. Subsequent replacement with the K series engine and gearbox etc occupying the same space but with far more output also proved a winner.

Issigonis was undoubtedly a motoring genius. Remember the subframes used on the Mini, 1100, 1800 etc enabled all the suspension, driving, steering and braking loads to be dissipated effectively into a thin monococque body construction which gave 50 years of production.

This was far better than the individual mountings used previously in the Morris Minor and other BMC Cars and at the time better than anybody else's ideas. It was another step of genius not generally recognised by the car world until years later.

As a result of these characteristics the kit car world used this subframe system with huge success.

My Midas Gold (an all glassfibre car) could not sustaining the shocks of use without the mini subframes dissipating all the immediate energy through the structure.

Similarly the Mini Marcos. UnipowerGT, Cox GTM, Biota, Stimson, Hustler etc etc ALL used the Mini/Metro subframe and A series mechanics.

So did the many Banham derivatives which I also enjoyed building and driving.

In essence the usability of the space saving, load bearing subframe design has never been bettered.

[Ferg]

richie barry said:

i supose but my point is why base a car on a metro when for the same price you could get a seiera or a granada or what ever

With all due respect, Richie, this shows just how little you know about the subject. Do you think all Metros are the same? Are you aware of the parts-bin rationalisation of the ARG models? Do you understand unsprung weight? Was Colin Chapman right to believe that adding lightness was the way forward for sportscars?

[Steffan]

[quote= Colin Chapman right to believe that adding lightness was the way forward for sportscars?

[/quote]


He was and he also designed cars with primary safety offerring exceptional braking, acceleration, road holding, visibility, aerodynamics and the use of ground effects. (On the track)

Another outstanding talent

[richie barry]

Ferg said:

richie barry said:

i supose but my point is why base a car on a metro when for the same price you could get a seiera or a granada or what ever

With all due respect, Richie, this shows just how little you know about the subject. Do you think all Metros are the same? Are you aware of the parts-bin rationalisation of the ARG models? Do you understand unsprung weight? Was Colin Chapman right to believe that adding lightness was the way forward for sportscars?

this subject was posted to imform myself not to be a smartass

[Ferg]

I don't think for a moment you're a smartarse, I'm intrigued by a comment like :

richie barry said:

i supose but my point is why base a car on a metro when for the same price you could get a seiera or a granada or what ever

...which seems to infer that a Sierra or Granada features engineering which would be better in some way.

[richie barry]

Ferg said:

I don't think for a moment you're a smartarse, I'm intrigued by a comment like :

richie barry said:

i supose but my point is why base a car on a metro when for the same price you could get a seiera or a granada or what ever

...which seems to infer that a Sierra or Granada features engineering which would be better in some way.

what i ment too say was why base a 'sports car' on a metro when under the body its 'just a metro'

[Ferg]

richie barry said:

what i ment too say was why base a 'sports car' on a metro when under the body its 'just a metro'

I have to say that with one of my own priorities for a sportscar being it's handling this would be why it's better to use a Metro than a Sierra or Granada!!!

In fairness, though, kitcars do tend to not use suspension systems unaltered.

[richie barry]

if you want handling why not use something like an mr2 most donor car cost a grand so why not have a mr2

[Paul Drawmer]

richie barry said:

if you want handling why not use something like an mr2 most donor car cost a grand so why not have a mr2

The way a car handles is less to do with what actual components used, and more to do with how they are used. Most kit cars will weigh less than and have a lower C of G than the donor vehicle. If they are also set up with different geometry, springs and dampers, then the resultant handling will have nothing to do with how the donor car drove.

If you take the Libra, which was designed to use Metro components; the engine/gearbox is at the rear instead of the front. The only suspension parts used from the Metro were the front hubs (but 4 of them). So the handling of the Metro is nothing to do with the Libra.
The Libra also used from the Metro:
Radiator, heater matrix, heater blower, window winders, loom, seats, instruments, belts, pedal box, steering column, brakes, door locks, wiper mechanism, handbrake and gearlever.

The choice of donor will depend more on the components available on that car, than how that car is as a whole.

[Frankthered]

Paul Drawmer said:

richie barry said:

if you want handling why not use something like an mr2 most donor car cost a grand so why not have a mr2

The way a car handles is less to do with what actual components used, and more to do with how they are used. Most kit cars will weigh less than and have a lower C of G than the donor vehicle. If they are also set up with different geometry, springs and dampers, then the resultant handling will have nothing to do with how the donor car drove.

If you take the Libra, which was designed to use Metro components; the engine/gearbox is at the rear instead of the front. The only suspension parts used from the Metro were the front hubs (but 4 of them). So the handling of the Metro is nothing to do with the Libra.
The Libra also used from the Metro:
Radiator, heater matrix, heater blower, window winders, loom, seats, instruments, belts, pedal box, steering column, brakes, door locks, wiper mechanism, handbrake and gearlever.

The choice of donor will depend more on the components available on that car, than how that car is as a whole.

That pretty much sums up one of the things I most love about kit cars - the ability to make something that's special from components that are mundane.

Although, to be fair, using a sportswear as a donor (like MR2 or MX5) can give you a head start towards getting a decent handling kit. It would probably mean that more of the suspension components (like wishbones) could be used as they are likely to be lighter than those fitted to a standard saloon or hatch.

[richie barry]

thanks for the lesson i finaly get it even a metro if set up properaly can be sporty thanks

[singlecoil]

richie barry said:

thanks for the lesson i finaly get it even a metro if set up properaly can be sporty thanks

I've had 3 Metros in the past,and really enjoyed driving them, I remember trying a Fiesta and being very disappointed with the way it handled after the Metro. There are a few people running 1.8 Metros now and apparently they go really well. If I was looking for something interesting in the way of a quick road car, I'd be looking into getting a 1.8 Metro myself

[Mr2Mike]

richie barry said:

if you want handling why not use something like an mr2 most donor car cost a grand so why not have a mr2

Are you talking about body conversions like e.g. an MR2 based Ferrari, or one of the Metro based Banham cars where most of the cars structure is original, and the changes are mainly aesthetic, or do you mean a proper kit car that uses it own chassis and suspension but uses various parts from a donor e.g. engines, drivetrain etc?

If the former and your target design calls for a small, FWD platform, a scabby old Sierra or Granada isn't going to get you very far. If the latter, then quite clearly it's not "just" a Metro underneath.

The Mini/Metro is a useful design with all the steering, suspension and powertrain is held on one neat subframe assembly, making it easy to design in to a FWD or mid-engined RWD car. The VW Beetle is (or was) also a very popular platform since the entire floorpan and suspension could be unbolted from the body and bolted up to something else. Unfortunately you really do end up with "just" a Beetle underneath in most of these applications.

[richie barry]

also i was wondering what is it car ownership like like prices runing costs eta