What a 2012 metro may have looked like
 

The following pictures are the Metro, Suzuki SX4, and Chevy Spark and the SX4 and Spark mixed together. I know of course the current Metro would more likely be a Swift or better, a Suzuki Splash.

Too 'cool' looking ( for GM )
GM apparently wants the car ( the Spark ) marketed to females so it has 'cute' proportions that make the car look cartoonish.

I think your Photochop has much better proportions that the stock Spark. It looks ready to pounce versus hop along.

The current generation of the Opel Corsa would be the closest to the original Metro concept.

I am still confused as to why GM (North America) decided to wast money redesigning a Japanese market car when GM (Europe) already made a decent enough car which fulfilled the same market segment.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...p_Facelift.JPG

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...-Geo-Metro.jpg

And no, the Japanese / USA one didn't have any extra power (indeed it had less in some cases) or flexibility or indeed space or safety.

Madness.

And the Opel Corsa is a good car for its class. I've learned to drive on a 2nd-gen one.

Its probably just below average in its class - you wouldn't knowingly choose it over a Fiesta.

Back on topic - the original Metro was a Suzuki underneath. The Swift has moved "upmarket" (Yaris / Fiesta land) and the new small Suzuki is the Alto

http://images.hpiexchange.com/1600/1...50224_ORIG.jpg

Current model in the UK has a 3cyl 998cc engine with 68 hp - exactly the same specs as George but it isn't the same engine - I don't think. They seem reliable so far (minor electric problems) can just about crack 100 (try that in a 1.0 Metro) and 0-60 is about 13 - in other words more or less bang on for the suburbs.

Add a turbo and that would be perfect.

I'd rather get a Corsa over a Fiesta anytime. I've always had better experiences with Corsas than with Fiestas.


The Chevrolet Spark is better-looking. But the 3-cyl Suzuki engine seems to be a good option, delivering the same power 200RPM below the Spark's 4-cyl 1.0L engine peak power, altough delivers 3Nm less peak torque, but doing so 1300RPM below the Spark's peak torque, might actually be more pleasurable for city traffic.

(please note sarc following)

Eh ? We are talking about the same Spark - this one, drawn by a small child with a Transformers fixation ? The one that looks like someone grafted the front end of a Cruze onto the body of a Matiz ?

http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/...1_1565527c.jpg

vs. this chariot of the gods styled by the finest minds in Asia ?

http://www.wintonsworld.com/cars/200...o_review-5.jpg

(also available as a Nissan and with the steering wheel incorrectly placed)

http://img2.netcarshow.com/Nissan-Pi...llpaper_03.jpg

/sarc ;)

The Spark could really do with new engines, both the 1.0 and 1.2 are a little long in the tooth for the small car market. Surprised they didn't use the Corsa 12v 1.0 ecoFlex engine - it is wasted in the Corsa but might work better in the Spark.

I seem to remember when Daihatsu started pushing the idea of a 3-pot in the old Charade (including a 1.0 Turbo Diesel - 47hp - form an orderly queue ladies and gents) their reasoning was a cylinder size of around 330-350cc which they had researched as being the optimum for a 4 stroke petrol. It was in the magazines at the time anyway. The 1.0 1KR-FE used in George is a Daihatsu unit.

I guess I am a bit strange for an American, but I love these little cars. When I visited the UK and Ireland, I really enjoyed seeing the vehicles. But I just bought a fiat so I am a bit off. :-)

Those subcompacts are not my favorite cars at all, but for urban commuting are a good option. And in many circumstances are already better than a motorcycle :D