Best mpg with a Geo Metro?

Like the other crazed buyers looking for something cheaper than a new hybrid, I went out and bought a Geo on ebay. My second Geo, a 3 cyc. 5 speed. I knew the risk of buying blind, but opted for a pretty straight body, calculating the likelyhood of having to drop in a low mileage Japanese engine replacement. The worst case synerio occured and I have both a trans & engine being installed. Its still cheaper than a hybrid and I am on the pre order list for a future Aptera.

With a bad engine sucking and burning oil 6 fill ups offered a range of 46-55 mpg, a figure I hope to beat, once the replacement engine is complete. I have considered the HHO booster, but don't know if its a scam? I like platnum plugs and synthetic oil and gear lube, but my mechanic frowns on anything not factory reccomended. I will run a few trips to gather a baseline for my best mpg, before or if I try the gimmicks advertised, but what can I achieve by careful driving verses the many products that lay claim to better mpg.

My first Geo was a 2000 Metro with the 1.3 litre and an automatic. My best mpg was 42 hwy. It averaged 37 mph highway doing 65-75 mph en route to Oregon. Automatics can only go so far for mpg & the 4 cyclinder was great on power when it was needed.

The 3 cyclinder I hope will meet my needs? Considering the 1 quart of oil it burned per 100 miles, I am amazed it reached 55 mpg. Cajon Pass, the Ridge Route on I-5 and the 15 North of Escondido suggested a 4 cyc. might of been a better choice, but then again the new engine may prove me wrong?

So what is the best I can expect and what gas saver improvements really work?

Thanks/Jay

My best mileage is about 65 MPG, but I average 57 MPG. Most of my increased mileage comes from aerodynamics and driving style. You can read more about it by clicking my sig image.

I suggest the standard NGK plugs and synthetic 5W30 oil for these engines. Good luck on your quest.

Thanks for your response, I am hopeful! The 800 miles I drove before checking her in to a car hospital were pretty good mpg for her condition, but the grunting on hills and mountains worried me some. My mechanic who once owned one, insists that a good running 3 banger will do just fine on the mountain passes of Southern California. I hope he is right! Like you he suggests keeping it all stock and doesn't buy into gimmicks. He also puts better mileage into driver habits.

I had a Mercury Tracer with a 1900 cc 5 speed and cruise control and achieved 47 mpg on my best tanks. So I now have 65 & 68 mpg to try to match from other users on this site.

I am on a waiting list for an Aptera, but that is a ways off. I do runs to properties in a family trust with three typical round trips of 90, 420 & 1720 miles. I use a Ford Ranger Pickup for some of these trips, but most don't require cargo space. Then I contact cities in my job and see a hundred or so a year, making fuel usage scary. While the Aptera is a fantasy car, regular hybrids don't hold a candle to a Geo, if you are hitting 60 mpg, atleast for the price.

Thanks again for the target range!

JB

I do have to admit that the 3 cylinder is slightly anemic going up steep hills. On a previous trip to Central PA, my Metro had a hard time climbing Cresson Summit and I had to climb in 3rd gear while being passed by fully loaded semis. How embarrassing! Recently, I did this trip again and I was able to maintain 50 MPH in 4th gear up the same mountain pass due to getting the car "tuned" properly along with a few mods I performed. I also learned that premium fuel gives my car more power and with the MPG's I get, running premium is not an issue.

Good advise! I am looking forward to the low mileage Japanese engine & tranny. I found the South bound I-5 Ridge Route in 4th going 50-55 mph, but then again the old engine was dead when I took ownership. Highway 15 North of San Diego dropped to 48 mph in 4th and I figured OK! Then the same night Highway 138 West toward Wrightwood did that 3rd gear thing and was less than 40 mph, I began wondering if I had made a mistake? The 4 cyc 2000 model I had with an automatic ran well and moved like a "bat out of hell". The 4 cyc stick I was guessing could have hit upper 40's on the mpg, but I wanted in my mind the ultimate without paying 24-30K for a new hybrid.

I just hope my mechanic is right about a 3 cyc having enough power, he says a low mileage engine will make the difference?

JB

My 93 Swift 4/5 gets better mileage and has a lot more power than my daughters 96 Metro 3/5. My average highway mileage on the 3/5 was 46 while the 4/5 was 50. Both driven the same. The 96 is definitely a heavier car and quieter riding.

Q

You are saying the Metro is heavier than the Swift? I kind of wondered when I opted for the 3/5 whether I was losing the edge on power vs mpg? I knew what my 2000 was capable of with a 4 cyc. automatic and guessed a 4/5 might get 46-50 mpg trying to, but the rumors of breaking 60 mpg with the 3/5 were just to tempting for me. It wasn't easy finding one with a straight body. As it were I drove from Southern California up to Seaside North of Monterey to get this one, from an ebay win. Winning one that needed an engine, might not of been that big of a win, but still way cheaper than a hybrid.

My Geo Metro 2000 with a 4 cyc auto. managed 42 mpg best tank, so guessing a 4/5 could posibly hit 50 mpg was considered. The same time as I had the 2000, I had a 1900 cc Mercury Tracer with a 4/5 and cruise control and I was pulling 47 mpg on my better tanks, highway. My daughters took my Geo from me because it was an automatic, thus the Tracer was purchased with a stick!

Our family trust that manages property needed a truck, which I wound up with as the only son, I have sisters, so both the Tracer & Geo were sold. daughters wanted power steering! The next car a Toyota Camry was a dog and was eventually sold for parts and now my daughters talk of Geo's, wishing they had never complained about wanting power steering. As both learned on that 2000 Geo, they too have joined the Geo cult as we are refered to. They both want one, but can't steal mine, as neither can drive a standard transmission.

I suppose there are clubs out there?

My concern this time was to get a late enough model with AIR BAGS! The body of my 1996, is the same as my former 2000. The older smaller version I found more of with the 3/5 but I really don't know if one is better than the other or why? Did the older ones get better mpg, were they the same weight? My mechanic said don't worry about whether Air Bags were standard, but being so small, it is why I went for the 1996 model where the new law kicked in. He is fanatical about not buying one where the air bags were previously deployed! I may end up buying another for my daughter, so I continue to want to learn the experience of others here.

Thanks/Jay

When comparing the same year, the Metro isn't any heavier than the Swift. Both cars got heavier when they changed the body style for 95. For safety and comfort the 95 and later is better. For gas mileage the 94 and earlier is better.

Q