44.2 MPG-all city driving!
 

I had my best tank ever today! Yes, I really got 44.2 MPG in all city driving while delivering pizza. It took oodles of engine off coasting and DFCO but I am a little closer to my 50 mpg (city) goal. The only real changes to the car from stock have been higher tire pressures, 0W-30 Mobil 1 and a 75% grill block. Otherwise, it's pretty much the same car I bought for $250 on December 21st.

Jim-Bob -

44+ MPG for $250?!?!?! That's fantastic!

CarloSW2

Well, I probably have another $150-200 in parts in it due to needing a few minor things sorted (tie rod ends, alignment, cam seal, PCV system clean out, etc.). Still though, that is less than most people pay for a non-running project car and I was able to drive this thing home when I bought it. Originally it was just going to be a parts car for my other Metro but it turned out to be so good that I made it my daily driver. My other Metro (that I got for $350) is being built from the ground up with a goal of 50 mpg city and 70 highway. I'm still gathering parts for it though so there really isn't enough yet to do much of a build thread.

Wow! You da man! That's awesome mpg for short hop driving.

If you knew how difficult it was to change the starter on your
2.0 sr20e you'd never turn the motor off.

i think this motor is underrated for gas mileage. with a stick
and the lighter body of the sentra (i have the g20), i think
good mileage is possible.

If he has an 02 SE-R then he has a QR25DE (base Altima engine), not an SR20DE. Plus, the B15 Sentra is no lightweight-especially when compared to a Classic (B13).

Impressive! I just spent the afternoon reading about 104 dissenting posts to this hack US News article that discouraged people from buying Metros: Why You Shouldn't Buy a Geo Metro to Save on Gas - U.S. News Rankings and Reviews Dozens of people posted about exceeding 40 in pure city driving in their Metros. It appears you're in good company.

I read that article before and found it to be complete and utter rubbish. Yes, if you buy the automatic it isn't really that good but the manual is exceptional. Plus, if you buy a Metro, you know what you are getting. It's not luxurious, but it is a simple, honest piece of basic transportation that will neither rob you blind at the gas pump nor force you to make huge monthly payments like a new hybrid. However, the Metro doesn't pay advertising revenues to US News and World report thus it must not be any good. Hybrids do though and so their advice is to spend 20-50x more than the price of a Metro to get the same fuel economy as a Metro. Those of us who own them though know differently and love them for what they are. Most of us know how to do our own repairs and can (and will) keep them running indefinitely so long as we can find parts. Once you own one it ruins you for any other car because by comparison any other car is just a money waster. If I had the choice, I would prefer to drive my old Metro every day over a new Rolls Royce. I would be embarrassed to be seen in a car that wasted my money like the Rolls.

I have found a local '96 Geo for sale with 126K miles but it is an automatic.

Are the automatics that much less desireable for FE?

Thank You,

Rod

Yes, a 3 cylinder loses 10-15 mpg with the automatic as compared to a stick. The 4 cylinder loses probably 3 or 4 more MPG to the 3, and the 4 door a little more than that. The ideal Metro is the 3 door hatch with a 3 cylinder and a 5 speed as it is the only one that gets phenomenal mileage without a lot of special driving techniques. Also, no matter what Metro you look at, be sure to check the frame where the front suspension attaches as it is a common structural failure point due to rust. You also need to do a proper compression test to check for burnt exhaust valves as they are another common problem. Given the choice though I would rather have burnt valves than rust issues as mechanical stuff is easier to set right than structural.