9/23/2023 0 Comments Mini metro gtiIt got one star.The news spread like wildfire, with stories about the 100’s poor crash rating popping up all over the media, and we’re not just talking about a stern piece on Top Gear by Quentin Wilson. It simply wouldn’t have known which car it was.ĮuroNCAP crashed it. EuroNCAP did indeed buy a 100, and there was nothing Rover could do about it. Meaning it would go out and buy popular cars, only to shoot them at a wall. However, it was and still is independent. EuroNCAP wasn’t and still isn’t mandatory. Plus, this EuroNCAP thing wasn’t going to be taken that seriously, right? Rover had its own crash test facility at Longbridge, so it wasn’t too worried. The Ford Fiesta grabbed three of these new stars. The Fiat Punto got two stars out of five. Rover watched as other cars were shot at a wall at 40mph as part of this test. EuroNCAP made us pay attention to safety. Formulated by the Swedes, this new set of crash tests would become the new benchmark on which people would base their in-dealership decisions. A new, stringent, methodical and above all, independent body that would test the crash safety of as many European new cars as possible. In 1997 EuroNCAP (The European New Car Assessment Programme) appeared. But whatever, the 100 made them happy, and the sales made Rover bosses happy so everyone was, um, happy. The same happy little car that gave those looking for a smaller set of wheels the chance to won something a bit, posh? Hyacinth Bucket types, probably. It gained a chrome grille, some trim levels were jiggled about, some colour options were added, but by and large it was the same car. That 100bhp engine could be screwed to 130bhp without too much fuss, though for the serious speed demon, a 1.8 K Series would fit, taking the Metro to giddy levels of power.In 1994, the Rover Metro became the Rover 100, to bring it in line with the rest of Rover’s brand strategy. Furthermore, the Metro found a home on the track, too. There was a 1.1 petrol for running about, there was a 1.6 16-valve with 100bhp in the GTi model and there was even a 1.4 diesel for the buyer who only wanted to fill the tank once a year. It was a cheeky, fun little car that appealed to a huge cross-section of buyers. Yes, Rover had knocked it out of the park with the R6 generation Metro. And the guys at What Car? don’t just give that away. In fact, the Rover Metro was so good, What Car? awarded it “Car of The Year” in 1991. It was leaps ahead of the old car in terms of fit and finish, it was offered in an impressive number of trim options, the styling was in keeping with the Rover brand for the time and the new range of 8 and 16-valve K Series engines were far better than anything found in rival cars. In the ’90s, it was given a slight face-lift before being given a complete overhaul for 1990, which gave us the deadly R6 version.Things started out well for the new R6 Metro. You could have a teeny 1.0 or, in MG guise, you could have a 1,275cc with a turbo strapped to it. It was available as three or five-door, or as a van. The Metro was popular because it was all things to all men. The key, as BL found, was to not replace the Mini. Sold alongside the Mini, the Metro actually did find a home with thousands of buyers, to such an extent that it was considered a huge success. Though it was still largely Mini oily bits underneath. To bewildered shock of BL suits, the public didn’t want a replacement for the Mini, much less one that looked like a microwave with wheels.īL still made the metro though, but only after a redesign to make it a bit bigger. Said focus groups got angry, swore at the designer’s mother and stormed out. They penned a design, which was code-named ADO88 (Amalgamated Drawing Office 88-inch wheelbase) and rolled it out in front of some customer focus groups. Without mentioning the fact is was about a safe as putting landmines in your boots.The Austin Metro, or the Austin Mini Metro, or the Mini Metro, or whatever the guys at BL decided to call it, was meant to be a direct replacement for the Mini. In the interest of fairness, we should probably talk about the Metro a bit. By the time it went off, the steering column would be getting intimate with the back of your skull. Some later models were offered with an airbag, but it was moot. It had all the structural integrity of a motorway services egg mayonnaise sandwich. Seriously, you’d fare better in a tickle fight with Edward Scissorhands than you would if you crashed a Metro. Oh, and it would kill you as soon as look at you. It was, actually, a rather good take on the concept of a city car. It was built reasonably well, for a Rover. It looked okay, and it had a decent range of twin-cam, 16-valve engines. A care so hopeless that even we, self-appointed ambassadors of the Rover brand, can’t endorse.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |