Faults:

Where to start? Nothing too serious though!

Water pump exploded, making a pretty fountain, got many admiring glances!

Engine mountings became worn (through enthusiastic driving methinks ;) ).

Points kept melting. Apart from that, it's been very reliable.

General Comments:

Fantastic little car. OK, so you can tell it's an old design, but it handles (and rides!) like a go kart. Leave the accelerator buried for a while, and the acceleration is pretty damn fast, even in the 1.0. Those A-Series engines are fantastic. Also, rattles are easy to fix - screw it or glue it, that's what I did, and it works. It also uses hardly any fuel. Mine did 50mpg at 80mph! Not bad huh? Interior might be cheap, but it's well thought out, and does the job fine.

I'd recommend this car to anyone who wants a car with bags of character, and doesn't mind hitting their legs on the dashboard when they change gear (I'm 6'2 though, it might not happen to everybody!)

Faults:

Absolutely nothing!

General Comments:

A fantastic first car. Cheap to run, easy to drive, and a little more whoomph than your average city banger.

Faults:

The gearbox has had to be replaced after about 70,000 miles, also the hydro gas units get softer and softer. So much so the CV joints occasionally popped out causing very loud grinding noises.

General Comments:

I decided to go the whole hog with this car. It started off as a 1.3 turbo but as the pistons began to wear I had it bored out to 1.4 and a ported and flowed head put on. This coupled with a big bore exhaust and K&N filter and a rise in the boost pressure has increased the bhp to 150 from my estimates. Great on islands when spax dampers are fitted. Top speed at least 130 mph! Shame about the gearbox else it is a pleasurable car to drive.

Faults:

The gearbox meshing and the exhaust front box.

General Comments:

A decent car but lacks refinement.

Faults:

I had the car just under two and a half years (56K - 77K miles). In that time I think I must have replaced everything.

First off the usual things like 4 new tyres, exhaust, battery, wheel bearings etc. Towards the end the clutch was in need of a replacement.

In addition to these I had 4 (yes 4) altenators, ignition coil, new gearbox, engine rebuild, heater matrix and other misc items. It didn't help that someone ran up the back of me causing more damage.

General Comments:

The car was in top condition body wise when we bought it and apart from some minor rust around the petrol tank neck it stayed that way.

Being the city model, the interior was sparse (not even a radio as standard). I thought that the build quality was nothing special, but I have seen worse. Nice interior cloth though!

Performance was poor, but OK considering its tiny 1 litre engine. Fuel economy wasn't bad (250 - 280 miles on 30 litres), although my 1.6 Cavalier can easily do that.

Rover parts are not cheap, but Metro parts are ten a penny at any scrap yard.

I don't think I would buy another Metro, but I don't think I would buy any small car again. I would however recommend the Metro, despite my problems with it as our other Metro of the same age hasn't had any mechanical faults at all to speak of.

Faults:

Everything you could ever think of.

This car is absolute rubbish.

General Comments:

New Rover models are much better, and I'd buy one of those. But these British Leyland relics are tinny, noisy and uncomfortable. The worst thing is the number of things that went wrong, especially on such a low-mileage car (21K when I got it). Rubbish. Avoid.

Faults:

As soon as I bought the car, it ran out of petrol, then during the year I've had the gearbox & clutch, brakes, front suspension & steering have been fixed.

General Comments:

This is my second MG Metro, my first one was written off. :-( However, this one isn't as immaculate, hence the repair bills, but it still drives like a fun go-kart with loads of welly! :-D

I don't care if it's noisy, or that it rattles, I give it 10 out of 10 for pleasure to drive!