Jump to content

Talk:Austin Metro

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Talk:MG Metro)

Opening heading

[edit]

By 1980, the legendary Mini was 21 years ago. Although it was destined to continue another 20 years, British Leyland needed to launch a more modern alternative in order to stay afloat.

The solution to BL's problems was the launch of its three-door Austin Metro hatchback. It used much of the Mini's drivetrain and suspension but a far more modern bodyshell. The 1.0 and 1.3 A-plus engines were upgraded versions of the A-series units used in the Mini, the 1.3 was also used in the larger Allegro.

The Metro soon became the best selling car in Britain and in 1983 a five-door variant was launched. In the same year, an MG-badged Metro with a more powerful 1.3 engine and a top speed of 100mph was launched.

But the ultimate Metro was the MG Metro 6R4 which was launched in 1985 as a rally car although it did find a few homes as a roadgoing car.

The Metro had a good amount of interior space despite its compact bodyshell, and the hydragras suspension gave class-leading ride and handling. The asking price was also reasonable.

After 10 years of production, the Austin marque was shelved and the Metro was rebadged as a Rover. It also received a major facelift which brought it nearer to the top of the supermini class. The 1.0 and 1.3 A-plus engines were scrapped in place of the impressive 1.1 and 1.4 K-series units. The MG variants were discontinued.

The original Austin Metro had suffered from rust, corrosion and unreliable mechanicals. The 1990 Rover version was an all-round improvement which had a quality feel.

1994 saw the Metro nameplate discontinued but the car lived on as the Rover 100 - little more than a facelifted version of the Metro.

In 1997, the Rover 100 was slated in the motoring press after a poor showing in crash safety tests. It was hardly a surprise the following year when Rover announced the end of 100 production - and the end of an important chapter in British motoring history which had lasted 18 years.

There was no direct replacement for the Rover 100 (Metro), but in 1999 the Rover 25 was re-positioned as a supermini - it had been facelifted from the larger 200.

Article text in Talk space

[edit]

The above text appears to have been mistakenly added to the talk space by user:213.122.37.28. This is the case for a number of pages possibly including:

Since these appear to be good quality edits, please merge the new text and delete both it and this notice when done. I shall try and do some too but don't have much time. Thanks. akaDruid 13:54, 25 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Cabrio

[edit]

I guess we all know there was a "factory" open-top version of the Metro/100, but unless I missed something (which is very probable), the article does not mention it at all. It would be very interesting to find out when it was launched, how it was developed and who actually built it - BL/Rover or some coachbuilder? BTW, where was the Metro actually built - Longbridge or elsewhere? Bravada, talk - 13:04, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I can't find a reference to it - but AROnline has a number of details on the car and I think is appropriate as a trusted source. DVLA records indicate 423 UK-registered cars; brochures indicate an original intent to launch the car in 1992/3 for the Metro Cabriolet - the 114 Cabriolet being (re)launched in 1994/5. The Cabriolets were built on the same production line as regular Metros according to most sources, and IIRC they're a Longbridge-assembled car). The Cabrios were developed initially with LAMM (also responsible for the official Mini cabriolet), then development was completed with Tickford, according to AROnline's sources. Prior to doing some research and getting concrete information, I'll upload some pictures of our 114 Cabriolet for appropriate use. TastyOther (talk) 07:46, 20 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Image found on commons

[edit]
Rover Metro GTi

FYI: - Leonard G. 22:22, 23 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

MG Metro 6R4

[edit]

I am, frankly, stunned that even an item of such significance as the MG Metro 6R4 Group B rally car does not appear to carry sufficient clout in order to warrant its own, separate article from the 'mere' Rover Metro 'shopping car'. I suppose I'll have to 'be bold' and tend to that. MRacer 22:57, 22 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed! I made a new MG Metro 6R4 page. Let’s hope it lasts. Hotlorp (talk) 01:41, 3 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"The engine was mounted back to front in the car, with the forward end of the engine facing the hatchback and the gearbox attached conventionally behind it and, therefore, in the middle of the vehicle."

- The engine is mid-mounted with the transmission behind it, so the front of the engine would face towards the windshield.

- The flywheel end would face the hatchback (and transmission). (666)

Austin Rover reference

[edit]

Took out this bit "or more specifically Austin Rover" referring to the launch of the Mini Metro. Austin Rover did not come about till 1982. I think it was still Austin Morris that launched the Mini Metro in 1980. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.1.231.233 (talk) 20:58, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Generations

[edit]

I've just changed the main infobox from "Austin Metro" to "Rover Metro" since it's not (apparently) a generation infobox but a master one. It seems wrong though to then have no Austin Metro generation box. But the bigger question is, why is this article not in fact titled "Austin Metro", since that was the model's first name, at launch. Thoughts? – Kieran T (talk) 17:06, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I wanted to post the move request later on, and you are absoluely right, the article should be called "Austin Metro". I am not sure we need "generational infoboxes", there was only one generation, though it lived unusually long... PrinceGloria (talk) 17:27, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'd definitely support moving from Rover Metro. However, now that I think about this more, I wonder if we should really go with the best-known and longest-lived name, Austin Metro, or instead the name it was actually launched with, which the article reminds me was in fact Austin miniMetro. Hmm. – Kieran T (talk) 19:18, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I think we can go for "Austin Metro" not because it is the most known (this is very subjective, to me living in the continent the car is a Rover 100), but because it is the original name, the "mini" component was dropped pretty quickly and it was added only after the name was decided for reasons explained in the article PrinceGloria (talk) 19:36, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Given the vast technical differences between the cars, and poor quality of information on the R6 Metro, I wonder if the Austin Metro and Rover Metro/100 would be better served by two pages? If not, a lot more information really needs to be given to the four stages of Metro; the original model was facelifted for 1985 including some interior design improvements as well as exterior (and many special editions which might be worth documenting, plus cabriolet conversions from Britain and Germany), the K-series R6 models are 1991 and involved a significant redesign of the drivetrain, body and interior. The 100 series is a facelift of the R6 for UK purposes. TastyOther (talk) 07:53, 20 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Page Naming

[edit]
  • The page should definitely be changed to 'Austin Metro', the car spent most of it's life being badged as an Austin. The car isn't well known as a Rover, however as an Austin it is one of the best known models, along with the Mini, the Allegro and the Seven. Most of the Rover badged models were part of the 100 series. User:Mtaylor848 12:41, 21 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Seconded. A strong rationale summarised above. Also consensus for switching the main article to Austin Metro and the redirect to Rover Metro seems to have been established for some time here in the article's talk section - have tagged this page onto the Requests for Move list. Splateagle (talk) 08:38, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Agreed - 'Twas an Austin Metro, and Rover generally called it the 100, moving away from the Metro monicker. a_man_alone (talk) 09:45, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Move?

[edit]
The following is a closed discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was moved. --RegentsPark (talk) 01:59, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Rover Metro → Austin Metro — Relisted. Vegaswikian (talk) 06:12, 4 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Mini Replacement Contradiction

[edit]

"The Rover 100 finally ceased production in 1997, ironically being out-lived (by two years) by the original Mini it was meant to replace." contradicts: "On 8 October 1980, BL introduced the Austin mini Metro. It was intended as a big brother, rather than as a replacement, for the Mini," and "It was intended to complement the Mini" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.237.64.150 (talk) 11:22, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Documentaries ?

[edit]

Do any TV documentaries or DVD's exist for the mini-METRO ? (not the 6R4 which has it's own DVD available from Duke video). Odd how a documentary or other TV programme exists for just about every other popular car but not the Metro as yet it seems. --Live Steam Mad (talk) 16:11, 27 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There is one produced by the British Motor Industry Heritage Trust, it's part of this DVD. You can see it on Youtube: [1][2][3]. --Una giornata uggiosa '94 · So, what do you want to talk about? 01:58, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Austin Metro. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 14:14, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Austin Metro. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 11:36, 28 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Austin_Metro&oldid=1205500062"