1994 Trans. in a 1996 metro? Possible? Other problems too.

[ssybert]

Hello everyone,

Recently I purchased a 1994 Geo Metro XFi. She's got some cancer but all in all, I thought it was a good car for the price. With 125k and it having passed a state inspection (no emissions here) I figured for $500 I was doing alright. First, here's the nitty gritty on the car:

1994 Geo Metro XFi
1.0L 5 speed
125k miles
recent full tume up.

After driving the car for a week or so I discovered some things

Driving 75-80mph fully loaded (packed with stuff) with 3 people I get 35mpg

Driving it carefully, mostly highway and no faster than 65 I get 40 mpg.

I didn't think these numbers were acceptable so I began digging deeper. The engine was throwing an EGR code and the previous owner claimed the EGR was JUST replaced. It looked to me like he was searching for a solution for the same problem. Quickly after (I've only had the car a little over a week) it began running very rough at idle and requiring a little throttle to start when it's cold. I turned up the idle a little and discovered turning on the headlights would dim the idle. The engine was not bringing it back up by itself. Whats going on here??

I decided before I go any further I was going to do a compression test. No use beating a dead horse. I picked up a nice test kit at Sears for $50.00 and tested the first 2 cylinders while the engine was hot. Both showed 95psi to 100psi. After trying the third cylinder the tester failed. figures. The tester stopped holding the pressure in the head so while I cranked it the needle was all over the place. I can only assume the second 2 cylinders are bad news. At idle, the car chokes like it's not firing on one cylinder. I've tried pulling the plug wires one at a time to see if I can narrow it down and each had the same effect.

So.... I've got a couple questions moving forward for you Geo guru's:

1) Is this fuel economy acceptable for this car? 40mpg at best?
2) Is the compression acceptable?

I'm guessing the general concensus is going to be to replace the motor... Enter the sugject of this topic:

I found a 1996 Metro with a new motor @ 120K... currently its at 175k, so only 55k on the new motor. All papers included. The car was a california car so no rot or rust...runs good, body is in excellent shape. The car DOES need a 5speed transmission. Lucky for me, I have one in my 1994. I've got a couple questions though on the compatibility of this type of swap:

1) Will my 5 speed from my 1994 bolt right up to the 1996 1.0L motor and chassis?

2) If so, is there anything else I should do while I've got the tranny out? clutch?

3) I hear the post 1994 cars have more advanced emission control and suffer worse fuel economy... my 1994 SHOULD be getting 50+ while the 1995+ get 35-45? Is this the case? Is there anything I can do to this 1996 motor to get it to run like the 1994s do?

Thanks for any help you guys can give me... I'm hoping to be able to know one way or the other on what I should do with this donor car for the weekend. The forum is great! Who woulda thought.. a METRO FORUM!?!

Scott.

[MrPink]

No, your fuel economy, even for a "regular" 1.0, is really low. I used to average around 40 in the city (I drove my lil '91 Bubble pretty hard) and 44-46 on the road at 75-80. The EPA numbers for the XFI 1.0/5 model are significantly better than the standard model- 53/58 vs 46/49 for the '93 1.0. You should be doing better- those compression numbers don't sound very good.

This is a useful site: http://www.fueleconomy.gov. It has all the "official" EPA numbers. You'll see that the fuel economy starts to get worse around 1999 for the 1.0 ('98: 44/49, '99:41/47, '00 39/46) and '00 for the 1.3 ('99: 39/43, '00: 36/42). Not really sure why this would be, (don't think it's smog) unless they did things like add a larger alternator or change power steering or such.

I'm no expert at all (though I'm thinking of turning this into a new hobby!), but I believe that you can bolt that tranny right on. Everyone else, please chime in here.

Something else you might do- walk into your local Chevy dealer and see if the part numbers for the 5-speed is different for those years. They probably will be, but if not, you KNOW you can bolt that beast right on. Also, I recall that GM used to offer rebuilds (dunno if they still do), see if the part number for the rebuild is the same for the two years. Last thing: call Aamco!

I can't imagine that there would be any difference at all. Suzuki is known for economy of design and using the tried-and-true over and over and over.

120K? I'd change that clutch while you have the opportunity. I sold my '91 with 150K on it, and recall that I was just beginning to notice the signs that the clutch was getting somewhat tired.

-Pink