Whats the weakest car out there?

[Stefanel1]

in Europe we've also our very nice cars
As this Ford Ka !

[Hudson]

The Metro (Chevrolet or Geo, depending on the model year), and the similar Pontiac Firefly, are no longer offered in the US. Production ended more than a year ago. It was a $10,000 (give or take) car in its basest forms. It was decent transportation and could hardly be considered the "weakest car out there." When comparing any vehicles, price needs to be a factor. The 50hp Metro was a fuel-efficient little hatchback for $10k. Let's compare the McLaren F1 which cost 100 times as much and provided only 10 times as much power. You can't compare apples and bowling balls.

While I'm sure there's a car out there that I'd consider the "weakest," all vehicles on sale in the US are good, if not great. We don't get the truly weak cars in the world.

There was a time when we had access to cars like the Chevrolet Chevette diesel automatic.

The American minimum is well above vehicles like the Reliant Robin or the Fiat 126 or any number of eastern European models.

For those of you from other countries, the Chevrolet Metro/Pontiac Firefly (Geo Metro in the US from 1989 until 1997) was sold in the US and Canada from the 1989 model year until 2001. It replaced the Chevrolet Sprint which was imported from Japan from 1985 until 1988. The Sprint and first generation Metro (built both in Japan and Canada) were sold in various countries as the Suzuki Swift or Forsa. The first generation Metro is still produced in Hugary and sold as the Suzuki Swift and Subaru Justy. The second generation Metro, as far as I know, was only sold in North America, only built in Canada as a 2-door hatchback and 4-door sedan, and marketed as the Geo/Chevrolet Metro, Pontiac Firefly, and Suzuki Swift (2-door hatchback only).

[Stefanel1]

The 126 bis is not produced any more. And the Reliant Robin is very expensive (more a gadet than another thing), you could buy an Astra for this price !
But in (western) Europe, you can get cars cheaper and better than the Métro/Firely for example, a Twingo costs from US$9 000 to $15 000 and is far much better. Even a Ka (I don't like the design, but it's personnal) or a Seicento for a lower price (8 000 €) are as least as well. I could quote the 106 or the Saxo, etc. etc.
So for 10 000 € (price of this Geo), I think many people would prefer a 206, a Fiesta or an Y !

What do you think ?

[YogsVR4]

I know that the Chevette was as weak a car as I've ever seen. It was a stripped out, mouse on a treadmill powered tin can. It should never have been allowed on the road. Riding a scooter blindfolded would be as safe on the highway as that thing was.

[Stefanel1]

What was this Chevette ? hp ? max speed ?

[Hudson]

The Chevette diesel I was talking about had some where around 50hp. It was rear-wheel drive and fairly large in comparison to today's 50hp cars. With an automatic, the Chevette diesel would take over 20 seconds to reacy 60 mph (about 100 km/h). It got great gas mileage but its top speed was around 70-80.

The Chevette (and the Pontiac Acadian/T1000/1000) was similar (but not an exact copy) of the Vauxhall Chevette and the Isuzu Gemini of the 1970s. It was offered in the US from 1975 until 1987 with only minor upgrades. The diesel version, featuring the Isuzu engine, was only offered for a few years in the 1980s. It was ultimately dropped in favor of the Suzuki (Chevrolet Sprint), Isuzu (Chevrolet Spectrum), and Toyota (Chevrolet Nova) front-drivers.

Oh, and there was the early Chevette Scooter which offered a rear seat as OPTIONAL equipment. The rest of the Chevette lineup had the back seat as standard.

Originally posted by Stefanel1
The 126 bis is not produced any more. And the Reliant Robin is very expensive (more a gadet than another thing), you could buy an Astra for this price !
But in (western) Europe, you can get cars cheaper and better than the Métro/Firely for example, a Twingo costs from US$9 000 to $15 000 and is far much better. Even a Ka (I don't like the design, but it's personnal) or a Seicento for a lower price (8 000 €) are as least as well. I could quote the 106 or the Saxo, etc. etc.
So for 10 000 € (price of this Geo), I think many people would prefer a 206, a Fiesta or an Y !

What do you think ?

I wouldn't say that the Twingo, Ka, 106, or Saxo were "much better" than the Metro...and the Seicento is considerably smaller. I'm not saying that the Metro was a great car, but it's hardly a terrible car in this crowd.

Get the Europeans up to US bumper and emissions specs, and watch those prices climb. There are reasons why those vehicles aren't sold in the States.

[Moppie]

The Chuvet (the correct way to pronouce it) and the Gemini are old classics in this part of the world.
Known for being totaly crap cars, they had a real resurgance in populartiy in the mid 90s when it became very popular to cut the springs out of them, paint them loud colours and if you had the money swap a modern DOHC Japanese motor into them, either a 4age or SR20det, an of course lots of Rotory powered cars showed up.
The light weight made them great cheap fun. Forunatly they all seem to have rusted away in the last couple of years and you no longer see any on the road.

The Susuki Swift was also a great little car to have in the late 80s, again its light weight and firm suspension made it great fun to drive, but then I guess the Jap spec car we got was a bit differnt to the US version.

The only Metro we ever got was an MG Metro, which was really nothing more than a Mini Platform with a new ugly body on top, and extremly soft long travel suspension. They were for some crazy reason popular with Autocrossers even though they would spend most of the event on 3 wheels!




And I still say you wont find a crappier car than a Trabant!

[Hudson]

In the US, the Swift was offered only as a four-cylinder unlike other parts of the world where a three-cylinder was standard. The top model in the US was very similar to the GTi offered elsewhere.

The MG Metro (also Austin Metro and Rover Metro/100) was not based on the Mini. They were actually developed to replace the Mini. Oddly enough, the Mini outlived its successor.

[Jimster]

Originally posted by Hudson
In the US, the Swift was offered only as a four-cylinder unlike other parts of the world where a three-cylinder was standard. The top model in the US was very similar to the GTi offered elsewhere.

The MG Metro (also Austin Metro and Rover Metro/100) was not based on the Mini. They were actually developed to replace the Mini. Oddly enough, the Mini outlived its successor.

Bah! The Rover 100 should never have happened!- It was the reslt of an over-entusiastic young executive who thought it'd be a great idea to put the Viking ship badge and a new front end on the Austin Metro and sell it at a ridiculously high price

*disclaimer*- this isn't exactly how it went down- but sometimes you can't help but wonder

The FIAT 126 is indeed awful- the FSM Nikki (A Polish rebadging- probably still in production) was well known for rolling over when cornered at any normal pace.


The Suzuki Swift GTi is a bit of a hot-hatch legend in it's own right- the 1.6 engine worked nicely with the light body and it was well set up for a bit of thrashing- but anything lower than that is a pretty awful deal- the only thing going for it is mpg numbers and bargain basement price.


Moppie- A fair few Vauxhall Chevettes even went past the point of pointlessly extreme- just check out the NZ Performance car yearbook to see what I mean there. If I remember correctly they were pretty popular in thier day though- I used to see them at a great frequency in Wllington throughout the 80's and early 90's- by the time I lef I was lucky to see one a year
:o

AS for the European rivals............

Twingo- Ugly, slow and crude
Seicento- see Rover 100- but replace Rover 100 with FIAT Seicento and Austin Metro with FIAT Cinquecento
1O6- Was great in it's day- but now heavily aged- only the GTi warrants the slightest merit
KA- Nice road manners- but has an engine not dissimilar to that of the Ford Anglia

[Hudson]

Originally posted by Jimster
The Suzuki Swift GTi is a bit of a hot-hatch legend in it's own right- the 1.6 engine worked nicely with the light body and it was well set up for a bit of thrashing- but anything lower than that is a pretty awful deal- the only thing going for it is mpg numbers and bargain basement price.

Besides your seemingly aversion to the need in the marketplace for cars with high "mpg numbers and a bargain basememt price," you backed up much of what I was saying.

One flaw, though...the GTi (and American-market GT) had a 1.3L engine.

[Jimster]

Originally posted by Hudson


Besides your seemingly aversion to the need in the marketplace for cars with high "mpg numbers and a bargain basememt price," you backed up much of what I was saying.

One flaw, though...the GTi (and American-market GT) had a 1.3L engine.

hhhhhhhhhhhhhmmmmmmmmmm........................I'm sure I recall at least one Swift havng a 1.6- I assumed it was the GTi- the only time I've bothered with Swifts is when the curiosity killed me and I took a GTi for a test drive- posing as an interested buyer of course - at that time the Australian magazine 'Wheels' was hailing it as a "legend" so I had to try for myself- I'd much rather a Peugeot 1O6 GTi though


But yeah- at this point of the market buyers tend to be after cheap, reliable and efficient transport- and tats really all that matters- hence why although the Metro was never a great car- it fulfilled what people wanted it for

[Moppie]

Originally posted by Hudson
The MG Metro (also Austin Metro and Rover Metro/100) was not based on the Mini. They were actually developed to replace the Mini. Oddly enough, the Mini outlived its successor.

They use the same floor plan as the Mini as well as the old A series engine and g/box combo.
If you stick a Metra/100 up in the air and have a look underneath the family resemblance stares you in the face.

It was developed to replace the mini useing the mini as its underpinnings, hence why it failed to well, and the Mini out lived it.

[2strokebloke]

You're right, we never got the really weak cars, we were spared from the Yugo 45 (the GV that we got had a 55hp engine)
Hmmm, the Trabant 601... 26hp... 32 seconds 0-60... 23.5 seconds 1/4 mile time...
Nah, the 1886 Benz Patent motor-wagen was more underpowered .5hp!