GM: Bring back the Geo

[uRabbit]

Why not? The Metro is still known for its ridiculously great gas mileage. Sure, Chevy has released the Volt and the Cruze Eco, but I'm still VERY unimpressed with GM. They need to dump Hummer, slim down the Cadillac line, and maybe even get rid of the GMC line entirely. I know they'll never get rid of GMC, because people prefer GMC to Chevy, even though they're the same.

I think a car company focused PURELY on fuel economy would be most beneficial. I think SMART may be the only car company to do so, and we all know those don't tailor to everybody. They should focus on cars that get no less than 28mpg city/40mpg hwy.

Just a random rant. What do y'all think?

[mika3585]

that is a really good thing and i know alot of people should look at that but now a days everybody want a hot sexy car thats fast really

[mika3585]

i have a geo prizm and i love that car really

[uRabbit]

Originally Posted by mika3585

i have a geo prizm and i love that car really

The Prizm is a Toyota Corolla.

Really, though, Geo had it right. Except with the Storm; dunno what happened there. Haha.

Everyone wants a sexy car, yes. Have you seen the Fiesta? Or, an even better example, the Nissan Leaf Nismo? Quite sexy. I had a Honda Fit Sport and it was definitely a sharp car! And I got 45mpg on one tank.

But more and more people are desiring back-to-basics cars that get great mileage.

[Moppie]

The Geo's were all just re-badged Suzuki's or Toyota's.
Why not take the Suzuki brand to the states instead?

[CivicSpoon]

There's far too much competition out now, for them to bring the Geo brand back. The N. American market is even more flooded with compact/sport compact cars now. So unless GM decides to take all their compact cars, from all their different lines, and label them Geo's, it's not going to happen.

And they already have gotten rid of the Hummer brand. Hummer hasn't produced a car in almost a year now, May '10.

A company purely focused on fuel economy cars, just wouldn't cut it now (in my opinion of course). Like I said, there's just too much competition in the market right now. Everyone has hybrids or regular cars that have great fuel economy. Many companies are keeping prices fairly low for hybrids now as well, and are very comparative to regular gasoline engine cars. A company focused on just fuel economy (verse horsepower), would just miss out on a HUGE part of the market. There are just so many new buyers of economy cars, yet so much variety out there right now. It would just be too risky for a company to try something like that. Now, if a company tried it before the economy crash, when everyone was buying gas guzzlers, they might have had a chance to steal the market.

However, I do completely agree that a company needs to work purely on fuel economy (verses power). At the very least, the entire automotive industry could use a big push, to make cars with better MPG. Comparing non-hybrid car of today to some cars of the late 80's to mid 90's, it's an absolute joke. My own car ('94 Honda Civic CX ['92-'95 Civic CX]) is very similar to the Geo Metro (42-50 MPG/70 HP). The fact that ALL car companies can't come out with simple, quality cars, with that high of a MPG, is ridiculous. The fact that there are so many Metros and that generation of Civics out there, should tell the car industry a lot, but unfortunately they ignore it. Seriously, how it is possible that car companies can't do what companies did 15 +/- years ago? Honestly, it's the only thing that has stopped me from selling my car.

Of course, this is all just my opinion.

[speediva]

Heck, I went out and searched for fuel-sipping coupes and sedans just about 4 months ago. There isn't much out there nowadays that is reliable or not fully riced out by some teenage slug.

I ended up with a '97 Civic coupe and my most common fuel economy is about 31-32mpg of mostly city driving, and my best in the last 4 months is 34+mpg but with more highway mileage. The problem with fuel economy is that you don't get POWER and Americans have become so addicted to the fastest and sleekest that getting good fuel economy isn't important... until it costs almost $50 to fill up a 16gal Subaru (like I just did last week).

But I will say that I'm 100% with you and I've been crying "foul" over the lack of fuel conscious choices on the modern market for years... unless you go hybrid at a significant expense, you can't get decent fuel economy. What a crock!

[uRabbit]

Originally Posted by speediva

But I will say that I'm 100% with you and I've been crying "foul" over the lack of fuel conscious choices on the modern market for years... unless you go hybrid at a significant expense, you can't get decent fuel economy. What a crock!

Pretty ridiculous that a mid-80's Civic gets more than a mid-90's and current, isn't it?

Big Oil has killed the car market.

[Moppie]

And yet in Europe, they have a huge selection of both.
From big V8 and V10 BMW's and Merc's, to little fuel sipping VWs and Fiats, as well as the full selection of Japanese cars.

[uRabbit]

Originally Posted by Moppie

And yet in Europe, they have a huge selection of both.
From big V8 and V10 BMW's and Merc's, to little fuel sipping VWs and Fiats, as well as the full selection of Japanese cars.

Because Europe (along with most other nations) are not pig-headed and as America... "/

[GeoRandy]

My 97 Geo Metro is rated 52 mpg highway, although I usually get 45-46 on this fourteen year old car. I could probably still get 50 mpg if I really wanted t prove it. I drive it hard and it almost has 200,000 miles on it.

That being said, I am appalled when I see hybrid commercials that brag about their 2011 car getting 35 mpg. When my Metro wears out, I'd like to be able to buy another....new, off a dealership lot.

There is no excuse for the Big 3 to not have several cars on the market that get 50 mpg or better.

There are a lot of things wrong with The United States right now, and if we don't all start to do something about it, collectively as a group, we're doomed. It feels like there is no guidance and that should be governments job. Everybody keeps screaming for the government to be doing less when really we should be electing representitives and insisting they insure that our infrastructure is updated, fresh clean water will be available aplenty, transportation will be economical, and that our children are educated and disiplined to better their own plight. We need goals, as a country, and planners in government who are interested and concerned for the well-being of the populous.

[uRabbit]

Actually, the highest rating for a '97 Metro is 44mpg ( http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/compx...Field=Findacar )

But you're right; it's absolutely ridiculous...

[Murco]

Originally Posted by CivicSpoon

Comparing non-hybrid car of today to some cars of the late 80's to mid 90's, it's an absolute joke. My own car ('94 Honda Civic CX ['92-'95 Civic CX]) is very similar to the Geo Metro (42-50 MPG/70 HP). The fact that ALL car companies can't come out with simple, quality cars, with that high of a MPG, is ridiculous. The fact that there are so many Metros and that generation of Civics out there, should tell the car industry a lot, but unfortunately they ignore it. Seriously, how it is possible that car companies can't do what companies did 15 +/- years ago? Honestly, it's the only thing that has stopped me from selling my car.
Of course, this is all just my opinion.

The Geo products were just Asian cars with GM badges - the Prizm was a Corolla, the Storm was an Isuzu, and the Metro and Tracker were Suzuki. Even though the were only badge cars they didn't have the reliability rep of the parent companies that built them and sales were always soft.
Building cars like the older CRX or old Geo Metro couldn't happen today. Those cars didn't have multiple airbags (later Geo's had d/s only) and ABS, no OBDII systems, and their structures wouldn't pass muster in crash testing today. Plus, today's car buyers want killer stereos with i-pod integration, bluetooth, navigation, leather (in even the cheapest cars), 5-star crash safety ratings, 150k mile service-life, minimal maintenance, and go-anytime reliability....
All those features add weight, and the government required many of those safety changes (the heaviest) while raising CAFE standards. Today's cars have all that and much more plus most can protect you in an America populated by big SUV's.
Think about it for a moment, power will always increase as a result of better efficiency so power being up is pretty incredible when you consider mileage is going up as well. Even a new Z06 Corvette gets 27MPG!!!
Yes, there will always be a market for basic cars but if you look at the history of companies that focus on them, or mileage, they have historically failed. As another poster said, there is a huge number of vehicles competing in the lower end of the market and the products have never been better! The new Jetta diesel gets better mileage than the Prius and is much, much more enjoyable to drive. The golden age of cars is now!

[speediva]

Originally Posted by Murco

The new Jetta diesel gets better mileage than the Prius and is much, much more enjoyable to drive. The golden age of cars is now!

But good luck finding diesel at a decent price. Yes, the mileage is better, as my aunt compares her Jetta diesel mileage to my parents' Prius, but we're talking 5mpg difference and she's spending an extra $.30-.50 more per gallon of diesel.

[Moppie]

Originally Posted by Murco

The golden age of cars is now!

I couldn't disagree more.
Unless you consider the current range of badge engineered, consumerised, sanitized, disposable transport modules to be the golden age of cars.