Rover Metro fuel efficiency

In news: snipped-for-privacy@pipex.net, Garland decided to enlighten our sheltered souls with a rant as follows

Um?????????

Metros are not incredibly good on fuel, but are cheap to buy (often free) and have fairly low servicing costs. They also have low street cred and are generally left alone, have incredible load capacity (washing machines, gas bottles etc.)

Personally, I like them and own several.

mrcheerful

The message from "Garland" contains these words:

Wossat then?

The message from "mrcheerful ." contains these words:

Provided the subframe mounts aren't shagged they're emminently chuckable, too.

Would you say the fuel consumption was actually bad, or just a little worse, than other small cars, I'd like to reduce my fuel costs...but am not sure if its worth changing as the ol' Metro's running fine...

Thanks

Always found our metros to be good on fuel consumption. We had 3 over several years. And as other post said, excellent for load carrying.

Dave

Your metro should do above 35 mpg, anything up to about 50 is possible, depending on conditions and type of use.

You could halve your fuel consumption if you buy the right car, but your other costs would rise, so I would recommend sticking with the metro , unless you do many miles and have the cash freely available.

Work it out over the expected life cycle of the vehicle:

Mileage worked out as currency, depreciation/residual value, interest on loan, servicing, insurance, etc. etc.

do the above for each vehicle you propose having.

I have a very uneconomic car (wife's Lexus) but all the other costs are very low, in order to get something 'as good' in quality and better in fuel economy would mean spending a small fortune, so we keep the Lexus and ignore the fuel costs, as all the other low cost elements, coupled with the comfort, make up for it, however, if we used it for a lot more miles per year then it would be worth changing it.

mrcheerful

Very true

================ Consider buying a diesel model (Rover Metro) if you're due for a change. Fuel economy is excellent - I routinely got 60+ per gallon from mine. The downside to Metros is the usual rust problem. If you're happy with Metros get any rust damage treated / repaired properly and you'll have a reliable car for years.

Cic.

There are too many variables. "Comparable" springs to mind.

Have you established your mile per gallon figure, brim to brim, over a few thousand miles?

Not to forget that it's cold this time of year.

If you're running in the city a lot you'll find the car thirsty.

Okay, figures?