Why I'm Choosing a Civic Over a Metro

[dcb]

Originally Posted by Higelac

shouldn't an automatic be able to match the HIGHWAY MPG of a stick shift ...I mean at constant highway speed, the torque converter should lock up.

Pretty much. IF you have a lockup converter. It will still be heavier and have more parts moving and some pumping losses though, so not 100%.

[HondaHound]

Originally Posted by Wayneburg

Well, now that I've been told the Civic HX was never a hatchback, I've had to do a little more research. So I'm going to go with the 1997 Civic hatchback which got 29 MPG city / 35 MPG hwy.

Well, actually I'll go for any of the following cars in the order they are listed:
1997 Honda Civic Hatchback Automatic 4 cyl, 1.6 L 29 city / 35 hwy

I have a 1997 Civic CX hatchback. Love it. But, it doesn't get that great gas mileage. I live in Los Angeles and do about 80% "city" driving. I get around 25 mpg. This is before doing anything eco-wise though (I plan to do some mods).

Another problem with this model is the transmission. I had to have it replaced at only 95,000 miles, which seems ridiculous to me for such a "reliable" car. My Honda mechanic said it's very common to have to replace trannies in Honda's around this year. I totally trust my mechanic.

HHINLA

[thebrad]

Originally Posted by HondaHound

I have a 1997 Civic CX hatchback. Love it. But, it doesn't get that great gas mileage. I live in Los Angeles and do about 80% "city" driving. I get around 25 mpg. This is before doing anything eco-wise though (I plan to do some mods).

Another problem with this model is the transmission. I had to have it replaced at only 95,000 miles, which seems ridiculous to me for such a "reliable" car. My Honda mechanic said it's very common to have to replace trannies in Honda's around this year. I totally trust my mechanic.

HHINLA

Weight reduction will be far more beneficial in a city environment (stop-n-go), aero is generally better for higher speeds (freeways). Not to say that aero isn't beneficial for city driving, but I would think you would notice a larger difference with weight reduction.

I had heard the automatic transmissions, particularly the CVT featured on the HX, were problematic for the 96-00 Civic but you are the first definitive source I've heard it from. But one benefit of driving a Civic, especially of that era is that everyone had one so a junkyard tranny can probably found for pretty cheap- on the inverse transmission labor on a FWD car isn't cheap.

[b1ackhawk]

Originally Posted by HondaHound

I have a 1997 Civic CX hatchback. Love it. But, it doesn't get that great gas mileage. I live in Los Angeles and do about 80% "city" driving. I get around 25 mpg. This is before doing anything eco-wise though (I plan to do some mods).

Another problem with this model is the transmission. I had to have it replaced at only 95,000 miles, which seems ridiculous to me for such a "reliable" car. My Honda mechanic said it's very common to have to replace trannies in Honda's around this year. I totally trust my mechanic.

HHINLA

Ive heard CVT trannies have had some issues. I havent heard about the standard autos though. My wifes 96 ex has 196,000 on its original 4 speed auto. On top of that i dont think the tranny fluid was changed for the first 150,000 miles, but i cant be sure, when i checked it around that time it was really bad looking. Ive been doing incremental changes and it shifts quite nicely still. She gets 30mpg without trying to drive eco, my dads dx got 38 mpg on the highway at 80mph. Great cars.


***add***
I know on V6 models for late 90's thru early 2000's did have tranny problems.
I believe 2004 and after is fixed. These had issues especially with 2nd gear and heavy city driving or towing. a trans cooler and regular fluid changes can keep those problems in check.

[guitarterry]

OK Im getting over 40 in my metro, lsi auto, I4 big block, I have 165/80/13 tires on it. The funny part is I could get over 50 if i didnt drive over 40. I do drive over 50 miles a day to work one way. I get basically the same results as metrompg as far as milage goes. The slower i go the better it gets. I have yet to drive slower and my milage not go up. The slowest i drove is 37 mph. But i got like 55 mpg for the trip.

also i have wondered why a guy who wouldnt be caught dead on anything but a harley on the weekend, would drive a honda car to work during the week

[hondaworkshop]

The 01 Civic lineup did not have any hatchbacks in the U.S.

The '02-'05 U.S. Civics had one hatchback model: the manual-trans Si. I drove one for two years, and rarely saw more than about 30 mpg...The Si is a sports model with very close-ratio gearing.

The 96-00 civics had great hatchbacks that were hundreds of lbs. lighter than the 01+ cars, and the 92-95s are excellent as well (especially the VX model).

For the record, I have an auto trans 00 civic hatch, and its a struggle to get 40mpg consitently for me. I tend to waver around 38.

[k.civic.f4i]

cant go wrong with a civic man. the only thing to worry about is theft but anything past 2000 should be fine. the most frequently stolen are the civics from 1992-2000. im from the modesto ca area(#1 in vehicle thefts) where everyone who owns a civic in those generations HAS to be aware of that security issue. otherwise enjoy the better mpg and WAY bigger interior room. if you can though, grab a manual. that's the only thing i regret

[k.civic.f4i]

America?s Most Stolen Cars - MSN Autos

parts for these generations of civic are easily interchangeable with each other and the acura integras(very sought after by rIcers).

just be careful

[cfguy2000]

I have a 3 speed Corolla. Yes it is hard to get 40 mpg. I would have to go about 45-50 mph on the freeway. Probably not very safe, especially in Texas with all the enormous trucks.

[SoobieOut]

I have had my Civic HCH II for a year now and have been very happy with it. I get 44 MPG no matter how I drive.

My only experience with the Metro was working on a friends about 10 years ago. I changed the spark plugs and noticed the interior windows had a sticky film. Further investigation of the cause was a leaking heater core.

So being I nice guy I offered to replace the core. Big mistake!

It turns out the heater core is inside the dash, requiring removal of most of the dashboard. Then found out that you need to drill out rivets to remove the housing!

The operation took about 6 hours, with a few cuts from the sharp dash parts.

Good news was that the woman who owned the car had Flu like symptoms for 6 months and doctors could not find the cause. After the heater core was replaced, her Flu like symptoms disappeared.

From that experience, I was a bit Jaded on the owning a Metro after seeing the difficulty of shade tree repairs.