Austin Metro

Austin Metro: which version to buy

If you are choosing an Austin Metro rather than learning what the name is, the decision is narrow: one generation (1980–1990), one body (Mini 5-doors), eight petrol 1.0 MT / 1.3 MT cars, all Manual 4-speed FWD, all Carburetor, tank 34 L. The spread that matters is 44–90 hp and 70–115 Nm.

If you are choosing an Austin Metro rather than learning what the name is, the decision is narrow: one generation (1980–1990), one body (Mini 5-doors), eight petrol 1.0 MT / 1.3 MT cars, all Manual 4-speed FWD, all Carburetor, tank 34 L. The spread that matters is 44–90 hp and 70–115 Nm. Fuel use, 0–100, tyres, gross weight and clearance are not measured in this catalogue, so ranking is by power, torque, specific output, and the four kerb weights that exist.

Austin Metro specs that actually separate the eight cars

Same name is not the same car. Distinguish every 1.0 MT and 1.3 MT by horsepower.

All eight: 2 valves per cylinder, Front, transverse, Independent, spring front and rear, Disc front / Drum rear. Engine size is only 998 or 1275 cc; stroke/bore is 64.6 × 76.2 on every 1.0 MT and 70.6 × 81.3 on every 1.3 MT.

Austin Metro horsepower and engine: what the extra displacement buys

1.0 MT cluster: 44 / 46 / 47 hp and 70 / 73 / 75 Nm. From the weakest to the strongest 1.0 MT that is +3 hp (+6.8%) and +5 Nm (+7.1%) on the same 998 cc. Compression is 9.6 on 1.0 MT (44 hp) versus 10.3 on both 1.0 MT (46 hp) and 1.0 MT (47 hp). Peak torque sits at 3000 rpm on the 44 hp car and 3300 on the other two.

1.3 MT naturally aspirated cluster: 60 / 63 / 69 / 71 hp. Versus the strongest 1.0 MT (47 hp), the weakest 1.3 MT (60 hp) adds +13 hp (+27.7%) and +23 Nm (+30.7%) for +277 cc (+27.8%). The strongest NA 1.3 MT (71 hp) is +24 hp (+51.1%) and +24 Nm (+32.0%) over that same 1.0 MT (47 hp).

Inside 1.3 MT, 60 hp versus 71 hp is +11 hp (+18.3%) on identical 1275 cc and almost the same torque (98 vs 99 Nm). 69 hp and 71 hp share 99 Nm @ 4000 and the same 54 kW; the 71 hp car simply peaks 550 rpm later (6000 vs 5450). 63 hp sits between 60 and 69 on power, with 97 Nm — 1 Nm below the 60 hp car.

Turbo is the only layout change: 1.3 MT (90 hp) is +19 hp (+26.8%) and +16 Nm (+16.2%) versus 1.3 MT (71 hp), and +46 hp (+104.5%) / +45 Nm (+64.3%) versus 1.0 MT (44 hp). Torque arrives earliest: 2650 rpm versus 3000–4000 on the others.

Specific output (hp per litre, displacement/1000):

• 1.0 MT 44 hp: 44.1 hp/L
• 1.0 MT 46 hp: 46.1 hp/L
• 1.0 MT 47 hp: 47.1 hp/L
• 1.3 MT 60 hp: 47.1 hp/L (same as the 47 hp 1.0)
• 1.3 MT 63 hp: 49.4 hp/L
• 1.3 MT 69 hp: 54.1 hp/L
• 1.3 MT 71 hp: 55.7 hp/L
• 1.3 MT 90 hp Turbo: 70.6 hp/L

So the jump from 1.0 MT (47 hp) to 1.3 MT (60 hp) is more displacement at the same specific output. The NA 1.3 MT 69/71 hp cars extract ~8–9 hp/L more than the 60 hp car. Turbo adds another ~15 hp/L over the 71 hp NA engine.

Austin Metro kerb weight and weight per horsepower

Only four kerb weights are measured:

• 1.0 MT (44 hp): 743 kg → 16.9 kg/hp
• 1.0 MT (46 hp): 747 kg → 16.2 kg/hp
• 1.0 MT (47 hp): 771 kg → 16.4 kg/hp
• 1.3 MT (63 hp): 754 kg → 12.0 kg/hp

Gross weight, ground clearance and tyre size: not measured on all eight.

The 1.0 MT (47 hp) is 28 kg heavier than 1.0 MT (44 hp) for +3 hp — you pay 9.3 kg per extra horsepower and lose the kg/hp advantage (16.4 vs 16.9 is close; the 46 hp car is best among 1.0s at 16.2). 1.3 MT (63 hp) at 754 kg is only +11 kg versus the lightest 1.0, but +19 hp, so kg/hp drops from 16.9 to 12.0 (29% less mass per horsepower). That is the clearest “what the extra engine buys” figure in the file.

Kerb weight of 1.3 MT 60 / 69 / 71 / 90 hp: not measured. Do not assume they match 754 kg.

Performance, mpg, tank — what is measured

0–100: not measured on every version. mpg / city / highway / combined: not measured on every version. CO2 and eco class: not measured. Fuel grade: not measured.

Top speed: 138 km/h on 1.0 MT (47 hp) only; not measured on the other seven. You cannot rank the Turbo or the 71 hp car on speed from this catalogue.

Tank: 34 L on all eight — range cannot be ranked without mpg.

If the search is “Austin Metro mpg”, the honest answer is: consumption is not measured here; the only economy-adjacent facts are 998 vs 1275 cc, Carburetor on all, and Turbo only on 1.3 MT (90 hp).

Austin Metro vs Austin Metro: version-by-version pick

Buy 1.0 MT (44 hp) if you want the lightest measured car (743 kg) and the lowest compression (9.6). You give up 3 hp and 5 Nm versus the strongest 1.0. Torque peaks earliest among 1.0s (3000 rpm).

Buy 1.0 MT (46 hp) if you want the best measured kg/hp among 1.0s (16.2) at 747 kg — 4 kg over the 44 hp car for +2 hp and +3 Nm, compression 10.3.

Buy 1.0 MT (47 hp) if you need the only published top speed (138 km/h) and the strongest 1.0 torque (75 Nm). You accept the highest measured kerb (771 kg) — 28 kg over the 44 hp car. Power per litre matches 1.3 MT (60 hp) at 47.1 hp/L, so this 1.0 is “as hard-working” as the small 1.3, not as strong.

Skip stacking the three 1.0 MT cars as three lifestyles. They are 44 / 46 / 47 hp on one displacement. The real fork is 1.0 versus 1.3.

Buy 1.3 MT (60 hp) if you want the smallest step off the 1.0: +13 hp and +23 Nm versus 1.0 MT (47 hp), same specific output, torque still low in the rev range (3200 rpm). Kerb: not measured.

Buy 1.3 MT (63 hp) if you want the only 1.3 with a measured weight (754 kg) and the best kg/hp in the file (12.0). Compression 9.4 is the lowest among versions that list it. Versus 1.0 MT (44 hp): +19 hp, +27 Nm, +11 kg. Versus 1.3 MT (60 hp): +3 hp, −1 Nm.

Buy 1.3 MT (69 hp) if you want 54 kW without spinning to 6000 rpm (peak 5450). Versus 63 hp: +6 hp, +2 Nm. Versus 71 hp: −2 hp, same 99 Nm, same 54 kW.

Buy 1.3 MT (71 hp) if you want the strongest NA Metro: 71 hp @ 6000, 99 Nm @ 4000, 55.7 hp/L. Versus 60 hp: +11 hp, +1 Nm. Versus Turbo: you stay No boost.

Buy 1.3 MT (90 hp) Turbo if the question is horsepower. 90 hp / 66 kW @ 6200, 115 Nm @ 2650, 70.6 hp/L. Versus the strongest NA 1.3 MT (71 hp): +19 hp, +16 Nm, peak torque 1350 rpm earlier. Versus 1.0 MT (44 hp): more than double the power. Boost is the only Turbo in the eight; everything else is No. Kerb, 0–100, top speed, mpg: not measured — you cannot claim it is the lightest or the fastest from this file, only the most powerful.

Generations: there is nothing to “step up” to

1 generation only, 1980-01-01 to 1990-12-31, Mini 5-doors, 8 versions. No second generation in the data, so “which generation” is not a choice. Chassis recipe does not change between versions: FWD, Manual 4, Disc/Drum, independent spring both ends, 34 L tank. What changes is engine tune, 998 vs 1275, and Turbo on one 1.3 MT.

Austin Metro versus Rover Metro is a name-plate question this dataset does not answer: here the model is Austin Metro, one generation, eight lines above.

Trim, size, engine bay, how many left

Trim levels, exterior dimensions, wheel sizes, engine-bay packaging, engine numbers, mounts, swaps, and “how many left” are not measured. Size in this file is displacement (998 / 1275 cc) plus the four kerb weights. GTA specs and 6R4 specs are not in the data.

Short decision

• Lightest measured: 1.0 MT (44 hp), 743 kg.
• Best measured kg/hp: 1.3 MT (63 hp), 12.0 kg/hp.
• Strongest 1.0: 1.0 MT (47 hp), 47 hp / 75 Nm, only 138 km/h top speed on record.
• Strongest NA 1.3: 1.3 MT (71 hp).
• Near-twin of that NA peak: 1.3 MT (69 hp), −2 hp, same 99 Nm.
• Most power and earliest torque: 1.3 MT (90 hp) Turbo.

Prices are not in the data; “what the extra money buys” here means what the extra 277 cc, extra hp, or Turbo buys in the table — not a market quote.