Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Posted ImageWelcome to the all new Geo Metro Forum. We hope you enjoy your visit.

You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are features you can't use and images you can't see. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Join our community!




Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Comparing MPG of metro G1, G2, G3, L3 or L4?
Topic Started: Jan 9 2009, 07:13 PM (2,872 Views)
lioninstreet
Fresh Fish
[ * ]
Ive seen differing opinions about this so I thought I'd put the question up for everyone.

Which Metro yr/motor/trans combination seems to be yeilding the best overall MPG?

Ive heard the EFI helps mileage, others say it hurts. Ive heard the G3 L4 is the best as it has the newest design tech.

Anyone care to post about the real world? :drivin
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
z34-5speed
Member Avatar
Formerly "Tech Certified"

Where did you get that info from? The best MPG Metro hands down was the MK2 Geo Metro XFI. 1.0 5speed. Over 60mpg from the factory.
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
metromad


G1 - Sprints routinely got 50+ mpg.
G2 - XFI Metro's routinely got 50 to 60+ mpg
Next best is a Metro with XFI components swapped in: Remove one ring from piston, change the camshaft, change the ECM, change the tranny.
Next best is a Metro with XFI tranny, Convert. tranny, or G3 4 cyl. tranny swapped in.
G3 - Best mileage acheived by doing the Next Best swaps from above. Some acheive high mileage by doing some hypermile techniques but most experience about 47 mpg avg. The heavier weight of these cars makes their mileage a bit lower.

G4 - There is no real G4 here in the states. Some consider the '98 and up and even the 4 door models sold after 2000 to be G4 models but they are really just extensions of the G3 line from '95 and up. Suzuki still sold the Swift line in Europe and other places and these may be G4 but Stateside folks are not going to have much experience with these so we need some Europe folks to weigh in on those. But that would not be fair so a Europe Swift site would probably give you more info.

Either way the 4 cyl. is never going to get anywhere near a 3 cyl.

Well, that's my .02 on it. Anybody else?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
metroschultz
Member Avatar
Please just call me; "Schultz"

I own a G2
1993 with the engine from a 1997, all my operating gear on the 97's block & head.
1994 swift 4 cyl transmission.
I routinely get 55mpg and if I drive really well I can get 64.
I will be doing some (Hopefully) MPG improving mods soon.
First up will be getting the 13 inch tires on.
This may actually hurt my mileage due to the fact they weigh more than the 12's and I went with the 175/70R13 tires to improve the ride quality.(My wife :wub: drives more often now and that is her biggest complaint)(Gee I put in nice seats for her you would think that would have been enough :P )
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Ryan
Member Avatar
Ryan

metroschultz
Jan 10 2009, 05:26 PM
I own a G2
1993 with the engine from a 1997, all my operating gear on the 97's block & head.
1994 swift 4 cyl transmission.
I routinely get 55mpg and if I drive really well I can get 64.
I will be doing some (Hopefully) MPG improving mods soon.
First up will be getting the 13 inch tires on.
This may actually hurt my mileage due to the fact they weigh more than the 12's and I went with the 175/70R13 tires to improve the ride quality.(My wife :wub: drives more often now and that is her biggest complaint)(Gee I put in nice seats for her you would think that would have been enough :P )
64? WTF?

I'd probably achieve better MPG if I didn't delay my shifts so bad.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Ryan
Member Avatar
Ryan

I don't even know what I get with my three banger manual. It's not bad when I shift early.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
metroschultz
Member Avatar
Please just call me; "Schultz"

Truth,
I have not had a 64 mpg tank in months.
That was my best tank ever. I have had a few over 60 MPG but they will be the rarity now.
My wife drives the Metro to and from the store and other short trips around town. She does not drive in a manner conducive to good fuel economy. BUT, with her driving the small car our total fuel use is down. Less miles on the Avalon and less overall gas purchasing are the benefits of giving up a little on the higher MPG car.
I still get 55 MPG average per tank.
I am looking for a newer (1996 up) Metro to put her in. It will keep all the interior and creature comforts and I can get my car back so I can try to get over 64 MPG out of it.
And yes,
Shift Early.
I am usually in fifth before 25 MPH.
No the engine is not "lugging".
But it is turning r.e..a...l s....l.....o......w.
S.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Bad Bent
Member Avatar
Facetious Educated Donkey

The real world, eh? metromad says, 3 cylinders get better gas mileage.

My '91 3 banger has no EGR valve and before mods got around 50 mpg. I get 53 around town with max 20% highway driving. Real world enough?

In Florida I'd get better mpg because I don't have 10 miles of straight, flat road within 100 miles of my town. The high temp. tomorrow might get up to freezing.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Will
Member Avatar
Victory is mine!!!!

The G2 is certainly better on mpg than the G3. That being said my record tank in my 97 1.0L 5 speed is 61.33. That is not what I would call a real world number, though. Driving conservatively it takes me right at 1 hour to get to work or get home. When I was questing for mpg this summer I was taking a LOT longer to make the trip, 1 hour and about 25 minutes. This is all 30% city and 70% rural state roads in Tennessee, so no where near flat roads.

You can put up numbers in a G3 that rival an XFi, but it takes an extreme level of hypermiling to do so. If I could I would have a G2, but I made a deal with my concerned wife to stick with a Metro that had air bags and met the stricter crash requirements enacted in the 97 model year.

Oh, my real world numbers are about 48-50 in the winter and 53-55 in the summer.

MPG mods:
8 degree timing advance
vacuum gauge
tires at 44 psi
no spare tire (I use fix a flat and a small compressor)
Edited by Will, Jan 11 2009, 06:19 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Johnny Mullet
Member Avatar
Fear the Mullet

My best tank on my MK5 was 66 MPG last summer when I really pushed it. Average summer mileage is around 60 while winter is more like 50 and sometimes less depending on road, temp, etc.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
rr87
50 MPG!
[ *  *  * ]
I hardly get 50 MPG in my 3cyl... :(
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
BillP
Member Avatar


What mpg should I expect on a 93 with auto trans at 70mph?

Bill P.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
metromad


34 -36. Tops.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Will
Member Avatar
Victory is mine!!!!

Agreed. These cars were meant for a time when the national speed limit was 55. Besides, there is a reason they called them Metro. Going over this speed will chew up mpg really quick. It's not as bad with your 1.3, but still not the best thing in the world.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
BillP
Member Avatar


Thanks...That's about the same as my 98 1.3 gets.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Fuel Economy/Performance · Next Topic »
Add Reply