1990 Rover - Austin Metro L 1.5 petrol

Faults:

Tyres wear down quickly.

Brake discs need replacing frequently.

Has tight brakes.

Rust now visible.

Passenger door lock out of action.

Upholstery worn and needs replacing.

Hubcaps tend to be looser than they should be.

Sunroof adjuster broken.

General Comments:

A fun, easygoing car with good potential but comfort is bad as the car is one of the smallest available.

Parts are inexpensive and easily available, however fitting them can be tricky.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 22nd July, 2000

1990 Rover - Austin Metro GTa 1.4 8v 75bhp

Faults:

Nothing has gone wrong in 23,000 miles of ownership, which is surprising for a car from Rover Group. It has not even rusted.

General Comments:

Excellent first car - nippy, cheap to buy, service and insure. Rather noisy and tyres are a strange size - must use Pirellis at £55 a tyre. Handling is good and predictable.

The only reason I would not buy another is the poor crash test results.

I intend to change it for a Seat Ibiza or VW Polo.

If you are young and looking for a cheap to run but very much fun first car - buy a Metro GTa.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? No

Review Date: 15th December, 1999

18th May 2001, 04:06

I own a 1994 MPI Rover Metro GTI 16v. It has been slightly tuned ie. chip, airfilter, exhaust, boost valve. It is an excellent little car with brilliant performance. Engine is very flexible - pulls cleanly in 5th from 30MPH! 0-60 around 8.0s.

Handling is good. Reliability is excellent.

This car is dirt cheap and should be seriously considered as a cheap hot hatch. If you want reliability and cheap fun this is the car Massively underrated.

20th Jun 2001, 09:16

I have driven a late Metro. I was surprised how well it went. The Metro was way before its time. It was a shame it got slaged off.

A Nova owner.

3rd Oct 2002, 06:35

A excllent review I agree with it entirly. Being an owner of a Metro myself I feel that they have an unjust bad reputation, being on par and above other cars of their class such as the Nova and Fiesta.

1990 Rover - Austin Metro C 1.1

Faults:

Front suspension wear at 90k.

Headlight switch at 70k.

Brake cylinders at 90k.

Rear N/S wheel bearing regularly.

General Comments:

Excellent car, handled well, never let me down in 113K. But.... that rust, I loved that car but the rear arches went at 6 years and after several minor repairs I decided to strip them right back. Big mistake - they all went. Also the rear of the roof went. Why won't Rover stop this rust thing.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 25th October, 1999

1990 Rover - Austin Metro 1.3 petrol

Faults:

New clutch needed, new brake pads, steering column replacement.

General Comments:

Fun to drive, but rattles like hell, uncomfortable, rough and ready.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? No

Review Date: 7th February, 1999

11th Dec 2000, 04:57

I have Metro myself so I should know what it sounds like. I have a PECO bb4 on the car and it gives off a nice tone when you top the ton...

1990 Rover - Austin Metro 1.1S 1.1 petrol

Faults:

Nothing in 8 years. Oh apart from a faulty HT lead. Cost £3.65!

General Comments:

Forget all that Metro stuff you've heard. This car is brilliant. Fast off the mark, good handling, the ride quality is superb.

If you want a small runaround, this one should be got. Not very high spec inside, but overall a very big thumbs up.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 24th January, 1999

9th Jan 2002, 10:43

I have to completely disagree with this. I bought one second hand with 60000 miles. Within six months, it had over doubled its price with repairs.

I have had to replace the gear change lever, radiator, steering column, emissions, wheel bearings.

The ride is not good, it starts vibrating at 70mph, and whistles above that.

The interior is poor (understandably due to its age), as is the exterior.

I would definitely not recommend anybody to buy one of these, even as a first car.

In reply to 9th Jan 2002, 10:43

1st Feb 2006, 15:18

To be honest I think that's rubbish. They are extremely under-rated cars. They are fast, quick, nippy and handle fantastically. The interior is good and when your driving one you feel like it's a bigger car.