what happened to the geo metro?/big car & big oil conspiracy?

[Greenblazer]

I call shenanagans. Both oil and auto companies are owned by shareholders. It is a fact that the majority of the wealth in the world is held by a very small percentage of the population. It is not a stretch to see that the same shareholders own both auto, and oil stocks, and they are motivated to make more money, not less. The more efficient the car the less money they can make on fuel. Follow the money.

Later,

Allan Greenblazer

[akcapeco]

The facts are that toward the end of its life here in the US, the Swift and Metro had terrible sales... gas was inexpensive and the full ascent of larger vehicles had heavy momentum.

I had been curious about this same thing, and since I purchased my Metro, I did a little research and came up with the highlighted info below, which I added to the Wikipedia article on the Suzuki Cultus.

If you are interested in the sources material, scroll down to the last section of the Wikipedia article, on MANUFACTURING, and you can click on the original source articles for the information here:

While at its peak, Canadian Swift/Metro/Firefly production reached more than 100,000 vehicles a year, the number fell to just 32,000 in 2000. In response to the waning popularity of smaller automobiles in the North American markets, Chevrolet/Geo sold only 55,600 Metros in 1997, off from 88,700 the year before. In a 2004 Autoweek article, Osamu Suzuki, chairman of Suzuki, called CAMI "a fishbone in my throat" because of its low production.

[joesgot4]

IF there is no conspiracy, why cant we just make today the same 3 cylinder geo that gets 45-50 mpgs and forget the hybrid?

[Krieg]

Why can't we make the Metro again? Because it doesn't meet 2008 safety and emissions standards, that's why.

The metro would get like one star on the safety rating. Who is going to buy that?

You can start adding safety features, but then you start packing on the pounds. A 3 cylinder can no longer power such a heavy vehicle.

Ever look at the curb weight on an Aveo? Take a look sometime. It's over 3000 lbs!?!

There's no conspiracy, folks. There's logical explanations for everything.

[akcapeco]

It's a bit of a leap to say the Metro would score 1 star on the safety rating. The Generation III Metro had been significantly upgraded from the previous models, structurally that is.

Again, here's some information that I researched and added to the Wikipedia article (Suzuki Cultus, the progenitor of Metro, et al), with sources of the info linked in the Wikipedia article:

Safety equipment included optional anti-lock brakes, safety cage construction with deformable front and rear crush zones and five structural crossbars engineered to spread side impact loads throughout the car's structure, steel side impact door safety beams, and daytime running lights (the Generation III Metro was the first GM car to offer DRLs), and dual frontal airbags.

The chassis was 30% stiffer than Generation II, and at the time of its introduction, it was the smallest car in the world to meet the impending 1997 North American side impact standards.

If you think about it, the Honda Insight was introduced in 1999, and probably didn't perform that much differently than the Metro/Swift... which though introduced in 1995, had to meet the 1997 side impact standards.

But the fact remains, North Americans are not drawn to stripper cars... even the Aveo with its available moonroof and keyless entry must fend off slings and arrows because it occupies the bottom wrung on the "ladder."

Naturally, the sobering light of $4.00 gasoline might have caused more than a few North Americans to recalibrate their... er... desires.

[99metro]

No one wants a car with less than 200 HP. With the exception of the Turbo Metros, most all the 1.0L have 55hp or less. It's all about how many bells and whistles can be packed in to a car (rear seat DVD/climate control, GPS, Onstar, heated/6-way leather seats, blah blah blah). The Metro is a simple and affordable commuter car. Who wants that? You can't really stick 24" wheels and spinners on a Metro (the image will haunt me in my nightmares for the rest of my life!). The Metros will lose, the BAVs (Bad A$$ Vehicle) will win. Minimal profit to be had building a Metro, big $$$$ profit building a BAV. In the end it's all about making money for the Big 3 or 4, AND the oil companies.

IMHO
99metro 3/5


For the record, MY metro has both driver's and passenger air bags.

[fshagan]

Originally Posted by Greenblazer

I call shenanagans. Both oil and auto companies are owned by shareholders. It is a fact that the majority of the wealth in the world is held by a very small percentage of the population. It is not a stretch to see that the same shareholders own both auto, and oil stocks, and they are motivated to make more money, not less. The more efficient the car the less money they can make on fuel. Follow the money.

*sigh*

Here's the with the major shareholders for GM:
GM: Major Holders for GEN MOTORS - Yahoo! Finance

Here's the page with the major shareholders for ExxonMobil:
XOM: Major Holders for EXXON MOBIL CP - Yahoo! Finance

Maybe its those *******'s at Barclays! Or State Street Corporation! That's it, they must be the ones flying those black helicopters!

[Krieg]

Okay, maybe 1 star was too harsh. How about 3 stars?

You'll be hard pressed to find a car or SUV these days that doesn't get 5 stars. Certainly, every single new vehicle coming out gets 5 stars.

How do the automakers do that? They throw metal at the problem (and air bags. And other things that weight a lot).

BTW, the Aveo weighs 2500 lbs. Just looked it up.

[Krieg]

Well, I found this: 4 stars!

1995-2001 Geo/Chevrolet Metro Specs & Safety - Consumer Guide Automotive

[Krieg]

Buncha crash test videos of the Metro on Youtube, too.

YouTube - Geo Metro REAR CRASH TEST (rare footage)