Welcome 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! |
| Metro vs. Prius argument feat. rabid Metro fans | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: May 17 2015, 01:22 AM (1,483 Views) | |
| perfesser | May 19 2015, 01:36 PM Post #16 |
|
Elite Member - Former Metro owner
![]()
|
Comparing a Prius to a Metro is like comparing a Chevy Equinox to a Cavalier. Apart from the mpg factor, they are totally different vehicles from different generations, designed for different purposes. How about comparing a Prius with a Jetta TDI? Take them both to the track and do 5 laps each, then 150 miles through the mountains of SoCal and another 100 on open freeway, at the speed of traffic. I would love to see that test in Motor Trend, done by real car testers rather than a fanboy site argument!! |
![]() |
|
| Spud | May 19 2015, 03:41 PM Post #17 |
![]()
|
|
![]() |
|
| Freeman | May 20 2015, 05:37 AM Post #18 |
|
The Family Man
![]()
|
Jeez Pref, Top Gear already did that. They pit something like a Jaguar (14 MPG) up against a Prius or something and it got better fuel economy around a track at the same speed. You have to drive with a feather foot and take your time for these cars to actually be fuel efficient. If you are trying to keep up with anything, you lose potential fuel economy. |
![]() |
|
| supercrust | May 20 2015, 09:37 AM Post #19 |
|
Corpse Pilot
![]()
|
Perfesser, those are good points, although maybe not in Motor Trend... All I can say is this, and in as smug a voice as humanly possible (and an inapprppriately British (?)(!) accent): "ReNAULT AlLiance. MOtor Trend's NINEteen Eighty FOUR CAHH of the YEAUH." We all make mistakes, but seriously?? I'd like to see a comparison between *that*, a Metro, and an old-school Fiesta. Heck, maybe with a Festiva thrown in for good measure. *Then* we'll see who's in whose class, and put those smug FESTIVA owners in their GOL-DURNED places! As I've stated elsewhere- I owned an '84 Alliance. Not a day passed during the following 6 months that I didn't curse at Motor Trend. Still, it's closer to a Metro than a Prius. It's way closer. And, Renault's bizarre claims notwithstanding, they did actually get great mileage. Extremely good under some circumstances. Hey, Motor Trend: OOPS. |
![]() |
|
| perfesser | May 20 2015, 11:17 PM Post #20 |
|
Elite Member - Former Metro owner
![]()
|
I used to work for a Renault dealer. I feel your pain!
|
![]() |
|
| scratchpaddy | May 21 2015, 12:09 AM Post #21 |
|
Not so fast
![]()
|
Car & Driver did a comparison between a whole bunch of economy cars in 1992, including the Festiva, Metro, Subaru Justy, and even an Eagle Summit. They disliked pretty much everything about the Metro except its shifter and its "trim and modern shape." Econ Majors In 2010, they did a comparison between a Prius, an Insight, and, as a joke, a '98 Metro (3 cyl, 5-speed). They hated the Metro a little bit more than the Prius, and they really hate the Prius. The page where they actually talk about the Metro is broken, but I remember them saying that the Metro's slow acceleration actually makes it dangerous, a claim I think is ridiculous. Over 600 miles of testing, the Metro got better mileage than both Hybrids, though. ![]() 2010 Honda Insight vs. 2010 Toyota Prius, 1998 Chevy Metro Regular automotive journalists never liked the Metro. The things it does best (long-term reliability, economy, easy to work on, etc.) aren't things they really consider when judging a car. 0-60 times are far more important to the Joe Public, right? Edited by scratchpaddy, May 21 2015, 12:09 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| Spud | May 21 2015, 12:15 AM Post #22 |
![]()
|
Sounds like all biased input from the companies. Maybe we start a Car and Driver like company and go out and get people unfamiliar with Geo and Prius to test drive then write a report based on that.
|
![]() |
|
| ZXTjato | May 21 2015, 12:49 AM Post #23 |
|
bass heads
![]()
|
saying a metro is slow to accelerate is kinda bs. they are not fast so to say but they aren't slow either |
![]() |
|
| Freeman | May 21 2015, 05:36 AM Post #24 |
|
The Family Man
![]()
|
Slow acceleration? Half the drivers are on Facebook, do they even care how slow it is? I don't see any of these arguments come up about my '74 bug. It gets 20 mpgs most of the time and does 0-60 in 17 seconds. It does the 1/4 mile in about 20 seconds at 70 mph. It is slower than anything I've ever been in. My auto Metro is actually kind of peppy when you get on the gas and the five speeds I had before that were all able to keep up with traffic. |
![]() |
|
| ZXTjato | May 21 2015, 09:47 AM Post #25 |
|
bass heads
![]()
|
thats what im sayin, my buddys camp van was SUPER slow before he put a subaru boxer swap in. andmy ther buddys van was even slower than the rest. toyota yaris 1.5 CVT transmission car is slower tha the metro i think, least it feels like it. semi trucks are slower the metro is not the slowest. i did drive the 2010-11 prius and what a lame ass car it was. my buddys mom owned the car so we took it for a joy ride, rather lame to drive i thought, felt like driving a soggy noodle where as his beetle was fun to drive even tho it could have exploded at any second. |
![]() |
|
| Freeman | May 21 2015, 10:00 AM Post #26 |
|
The Family Man
![]()
|
My VW went toe to toe with semi trucks, except I was flooring it and I don't think they were. At least until the top end of second when the bug picked up. |
![]() |
|
| Rondawg | May 21 2015, 10:05 AM Post #27 |
![]()
|
Wanna talk about slow.....my old VW Rabbit Diesel pickup was the slowest I ever had. Pretty much run it wide open and adjust the speed by what gear you were in. |
![]() |
|
| scratchpaddy | May 21 2015, 11:58 AM Post #28 |
|
Not so fast
![]()
|
Okay, I pulled up cache of the broken webpage, and they complained about how slow it was, but didn't call it dangerous. Also, it didn't beat the Prius in mileage, but tied it for first place at 42mpg.
The "dangerously slow" thing was in an incredibly snobbish editorial they wrote in 2008, at the height of that gas crisis, right after a '92 Metro XFi sold for $7,200 on eBay. The article mentioned that point over and over and over again, as if every used Metro sold for that much.
You don't have to push a Metro that hard to outrun your average soccer mom in a CR-V. I'm usually frustrated by how slow people are to get up to speed on freeway on-ramps, and that hasn't changed since I got the Metro. The article actually suggests that you should buy an old Ferrari or Porsche instead, since those cars would surely be better maintained than an old Metro. That's true, because if you don't check up on an old Ferrari every few miles, it's liable to catch on fire. But of course, I'm sure an old, well-maintained Ferrari would be more economical than a much-abused econobox. Shall we talk about what those go for on eBay?
|
![]() |
|
| Old Man | May 21 2015, 12:11 PM Post #29 |
![]()
|
I can talk about SLOW. Back in the early 60s I owned an early 50s VW flatbed pick-up, the kind with the fold down sides. 36 horse power. Took a mile of flat ground to get up to a FULL TOP SPEED of 57 miles per hour. But it was a workhorse for its time. Did not matter if it was empty or had a two ton load, speed was the same---but then, stopping was a problem too. |
![]() |
|
| ZXTjato | May 21 2015, 03:16 PM Post #30 |
|
bass heads
![]()
|
metros top speed is only 87 mph???? how is that correct? |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · The Geo Metro Lounge · Next Topic » |


Welcome to the all new Geo Metro Forum. We hope you enjoy your visit.






But of course, I'm sure an old, well-maintained Ferrari would be more economical than a much-abused econobox. Shall we talk about what those go for on eBay?

7:51 PM Jul 10