TeamSwift

Home of the Suzuki mini-compacts ! Your Home for all things Suzuki Swift, Geo Metro, Holden Barina, Chevy Sprint, Pontiac Firefly, and Suzuki Cultus. TeamSwift is a technical performance oriented community!
It is currently Mon Oct 23, 2017 3:36 am

Underbody braces, turbos and more!

All times are UTC - 5 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 8 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: mk4/mk5 best looking!
PostPosted: Sun Aug 22, 2010 3:49 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Nov 01, 2009 12:32 pm
Posts: 48
Location: Larue Ohio
I like all metros but I like the looks of the mk4/mk5 the best. I know they are heavier and a little bigger but still like them the best. Why is the mk4/mk5 only offered to North America? Too bad there was never a mk4/mk5 vert!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Aug 22, 2010 4:57 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2007 1:35 pm
Posts: 2433
Location: Regina, SK
It's more why is it illegal to bring a 2000 Swift GTi from Europe over here... They would never have passed the crash standards. So GM made Suzuki redesign the Swift to be able to pass the requirements, it's why dual airbags became standard, side impact beams, etc.

_________________
My cars:

J. McBean: '98 Suzuki Swift 1.3L 16v SOHC 5sp+ "Mk5" Made in Canada
The Mini Rattler: '94 Suzuki Swift .993L 6v SOHC 5sp+ "Mk3" Made in Canada *The Winter Beater*
B. Berry: '90 Chevrolet Turbo Sprint 1.0L 6v SOHC 5sp+ "Mk2" Made in Japan

I got 18MPG in a 3cyl with a 5 speed manual 4dr, '93 Metro! :yeahyeah


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Aug 22, 2010 8:26 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jul 01, 2008 11:02 pm
Posts: 644
Location: North Florida
Wikipedia has credited the GM Technical Center in Warren, MI with both the '89 & '95 Metro designs for at least 2 years. These cars are built on the GM M platform & Suzuki apparently didn't design or "redesign" them.

gamefoo21 wrote:
They would never have passed the crash standards. So GM made Suzuki redesign the Swift to be able to pass the requirements, it's why dual airbags became standard, side impact beams, etc.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suzuki_Cul ... ro_history

The way I understand it GM wasn't satisfied to merely "have passed crash standards" & actually ended up exceeded them, hoping to dispel bad publicity from the weaker early designs. The old Metro's poor safety reputation was probably behind dropping Geo & rebranding as Chevy.

_________________
2000 Chevy Metro 3 cylinder 5 speed 3 door hatch
1998 Chevy Metro 3 cylinder 5 speed 3 door hatch
1998 Chevy Lumina APV
1998 Ford F-150 4X4 XLT
1992 Ford E-150 Club Wagon Chateau
1991 SAAB 900S 5 speed
1987 SAAB 900 Turbo SPG
1985 SAAB 900 Turbo SPG
1974 SAAB Sonett III
1971 SAAB 96 modified to 1980 specs
1966 SAAB 96
1960 SAAB 93F
1958 SAAB 93B
1964 Willys JEEP CJ-5
1954 Willys JEEP M-170 military ambulance
1953 Grumman Kurbside step van


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Aug 22, 2010 10:37 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Nov 01, 2009 12:32 pm
Posts: 48
Location: Larue Ohio
I've also read about a guy having trouble bringing a Canadian Swift here to the US. He bought it and then couldn't register it here. I think he parted it out.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Aug 23, 2010 2:48 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2007 1:35 pm
Posts: 2433
Location: Regina, SK
Old3banger wrote:
Wikipedia has credited the GM Technical Center in Warren, MI with both the '89 & '95 Metro designs for at least 2 years. These cars are built on the GM M platform & Suzuki apparently didn't design or "redesign" them.

gamefoo21 wrote:
They would never have passed the crash standards. So GM made Suzuki redesign the Swift to be able to pass the requirements, it's why dual airbags became standard, side impact beams, etc.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suzuki_Cul ... ro_history


:lol:

So that's why Suzuki Sold the Cultus with many versions and options overseas that we never had here?? Right??? :lol:

More like GM's technical service center did the Geo 'rebadge'.

There is also a very good reason no worthwhile post-secondary institution will allow Wikipedia to be quoted as a source, it is often incorrect or just simply incomplete.

Next you are going to tell me that the G series engine are actually a GM design... =)

I've read and I've edited that wiki-post in the past, and it's changed again from the quick read through...

Oi... there is so much revisionist history in there, trying to make these cars seem like a GM design. The fact of the matter is, the first Mk2 cars rolled out of Japanese plants, the Mk2 body was used by Suzuki all over the globe. Did it have influence from GM, probably due to the 'partnership' which also meant Suzuki had little power in the N/A market thus the Daewoo sourced 'Swift+'. The Mk4/5 bodies are based on the 4 Door body wheel plan, again GM influenced but a Suzuki product, order parts at the dealer, guess what that GM sticker is placed over... I have lots of NOS Turbo Sprint parts, and all of them have a Suzuki part number.

I do love the revisionist history though, the Metro was always the rebadged bastard child. The Swift had more options, until the 95-01 N/A body style which again, Japanese struts, castings, etc. etc. In the US, GM dictacted that the Swift wasn't allowed to carry the 3cylinder, yet up here the Swift did come with the 1.0, or the 1.6 GLX again, Suzuki only... :lol:

Oh... and for the convertible model...

http://my.reset.jp/~inu/ProductsDataBas ... rtible.htm

Oh snap... An american style car to remind you of the west coast, no airbag in that steering wheel, 4.1:1 final drive with 80hp and 14" wheels... So again, GM specced it down for the market... :lol:

_________________
My cars:

J. McBean: '98 Suzuki Swift 1.3L 16v SOHC 5sp+ "Mk5" Made in Canada
The Mini Rattler: '94 Suzuki Swift .993L 6v SOHC 5sp+ "Mk3" Made in Canada *The Winter Beater*
B. Berry: '90 Chevrolet Turbo Sprint 1.0L 6v SOHC 5sp+ "Mk2" Made in Japan

I got 18MPG in a 3cyl with a 5 speed manual 4dr, '93 Metro! :yeahyeah


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Aug 23, 2010 11:48 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jul 01, 2008 11:02 pm
Posts: 644
Location: North Florida
Of course Wikipedia is not alone in crediting GM, especially w/the '95 Metro design. Over the last couple of years I've reread Wikipedia's history of these cars several times & never seen anything other than GM Warren, MI credited w/designing the '89 & '95 incarnations of these vehicles.

No, not "going to tell" you the engine is a GM design. Too bad whatever you tried "to tell" Wikipedia apparently never stuck.

gamefoo21 wrote:
There is also a very good reason no worthwhile post-secondary institution will allow Wikipedia to be quoted as a source, it is often incorrect or just simply incomplete.

Next you are going to tell me that the G series engine are actually a GM design...

I've read and I've edited that wiki-post in the past, and it's changed again from the quick read through...


'The Auto Channel' among others, concurs w/Wikipedia. Under comments about the introduction of the '95 Metro, Bill Russ claims "This new third generation model was designed at General Motors Design Center...".

http://www.theautochannel.com/vehicles/ ... k9509.html

This Q has come up before. Somebody mentioned a 'History Channel' segment showing GM designers & engineers w/the '95 prototype apparently in MI. Got the impression that the Q was settled.

Somebody here claimed the '89 & up Metro was made in Japan. Wikipedia claims that CAMI in Ingersoll, Ontario made the north American cars. Thought that was settled too, w/the possibly exception of some, if not all, of the 'verts'.

So who designed the '95 & up Metro, if Wikipedia has "the revisionist history"? The earlier cars really don't interest me much, I only go for the Chevy Metros w/the enhanced safety features & prefer the OBD2 diagostics.

_________________
2000 Chevy Metro 3 cylinder 5 speed 3 door hatch
1998 Chevy Metro 3 cylinder 5 speed 3 door hatch
1998 Chevy Lumina APV
1998 Ford F-150 4X4 XLT
1992 Ford E-150 Club Wagon Chateau
1991 SAAB 900S 5 speed
1987 SAAB 900 Turbo SPG
1985 SAAB 900 Turbo SPG
1974 SAAB Sonett III
1971 SAAB 96 modified to 1980 specs
1966 SAAB 96
1960 SAAB 93F
1958 SAAB 93B
1964 Willys JEEP CJ-5
1954 Willys JEEP M-170 military ambulance
1953 Grumman Kurbside step van


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 24, 2010 1:13 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2007 1:35 pm
Posts: 2433
Location: Regina, SK
LoL, nothing sticks to Wiki...

All of the GT/GTi cars were built in Japan.

:lol: Read my sig, my mom's Turbo car was also built across the pond. I have a '94 Swift that was built at CAMI.

:lol:

So 95-97 Swifts, Metros, Fireflies, Sprints with OBD1 are not worthy? Why is the OBDII engine in my '98 running an ECU built in Japan? Every last nut and bolt I've ordered from Suzuki for that car has had 'Made In Japan' stamped on it?

Why oh why would something that is so pure of a GM design use so many Japanese parts? Oh, wait GM dictated to Suzuki what they wanted and with their input Suzuki redesigned the Swift. This is has happened with several vehicles that Suzuki has put out here, they have colluded with GM engineers.

The reason why Wiki seems to get re-edited to paint a Pro-GM revision of the 'captive import' is because there are deluded fools like you. Why does my Suzuki FSM have more info than the Chevy FSM? Why does it have more technical info? Why is it originally of it's final revision before the GM one?

I will give you this much... Yes GM is credited with the design of the Metro, just like they are credited with design of the Storm, Prizm, Tracker, Spectrum... Guess who made the originals though... Of course GM will take credit for each car it redesigns. :lol:

Quote:
The Geo Metro was a small economy car based on the Suzuki Swift (Cultus). It was produced from 1989 to 2001 model years. The first generation was offered in three and five-door hatchback models as well as a 4-door notchback sedan that was only sold in Canada. In 1990, a convertible was available but was phased out after 1993. Metros came in three trim levels: XFi, Base or LSi. The XFi's engine has less horsepower than the base and LSi and achieved startling gas mileage 53 MPG (city) 58 MPG (highway). However all of the Metros at this time had three cylinder engines with a 5-speed manual or 3-speed automatic transmission. The convertible is also the only first-generation Metro to offer an airbag. In 1995 the Metro was redesigned with a more modern appearance and offered a 70hp four-cylinder engine, standard dual airbags and optional anti-lock brakes. A four-door sedan replaced the five-door hatchback. The XFi did not return for 1995 and only the base and LSi models were offered. The three-cylinder engined remained in the base hatchback. In 1998 the Metro, now branded as a Chevrolet, was revamped one last time. It was given a minor re-styling, improved headlamps, and improved four cylinder engine, now producing 79 horsepower. 2000 was the last year for the Metro hatchback and the three cylinder engine. All 2001 models were four-door sedans that were sold to fleets only.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geo_(automobile)

Shock... Surprise... Wiki agrees with me... :O

So keep on driving your rebadge and the reason it's so reliable is because Suzuki managed to keep most of the parts Japanese. Since you know, it's based on the floorpan of the 4 door 89-94 N/A models. While the differences between the Metro and the Swift in the 95-01 model years is small there is enough, for GM to claim the design was theirs... =)

_________________
My cars:

J. McBean: '98 Suzuki Swift 1.3L 16v SOHC 5sp+ "Mk5" Made in Canada
The Mini Rattler: '94 Suzuki Swift .993L 6v SOHC 5sp+ "Mk3" Made in Canada *The Winter Beater*
B. Berry: '90 Chevrolet Turbo Sprint 1.0L 6v SOHC 5sp+ "Mk2" Made in Japan

I got 18MPG in a 3cyl with a 5 speed manual 4dr, '93 Metro! :yeahyeah


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 24, 2010 12:50 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jul 01, 2008 11:02 pm
Posts: 644
Location: North Florida
What I said was I "prefer the OBD2 diagnostics". No reason for you to assume anything else. If someone prefers blue over red, it doesn't automatically mean red "is not worthy". Same w/the "enhanced safety features" of the Chevy Metro. Each to his own interests.

Plenty of things are designed in one country & mass produced in another. Many are built in several countries. My understanding was that CAMI Ingersoll, Ontario included a 'stamping plant' that made chassis & body panels from flat sheet & assembled them. You've never read any suggestion from me that the drivetrain wasn't Suzuki, which naturally make up a majority of parts. GM & Suzuki are said to have collaborated. I'd assumed Suzuki got responsibility for spare parts in their deal. It is your opinion that "GM dictated to Suzuki".

gamefoo21 wrote:
So 95-97 Swifts, Metros, Fireflies, Sprints with OBD1 are not worthy? Why is the OBDII engine in my '98 running an ECU built in Japan? Every last nut and bolt I've ordered from Suzuki for that car has had 'Made In Japan' stamped on it?

Why oh why would something that is so pure of a GM design use so many Japanese parts? Oh, wait GM dictated to Suzuki what they wanted and with their input Suzuki redesigned the Swift. This is has happened with several vehicles that Suzuki has put out here, they have colluded with GM engineers.

The reason why Wiki seems to get re-edited to paint a Pro-GM revision of the 'captive import' is because there are deluded fools like you.

I will give you this much... Yes GM is credited with the design of the Metro, just like they are credited with design of the Storm, Prizm, Tracker, Spectrum...

While the differences between the Metro and the Swift in the 95-01 model years is small there is enough, for GM to claim the design was theirs


You failed to address 'The Auto Channel'-(billed as "the largest independant source of automotive information")-comment by Bill Russ, or acknowledge others, of which there are many, except to lump them all as "deluded fools". Add subcompactculture.com to your list of "revisionist history".

You claim the Metro history on "Wiki seems to get re-edited" but I've never once seen anything but the claim for GM Design Center in Warren, MI. There's no doubt "Yes GM is credited with the design of the Metro" at least the '95 & up. However, for the sake of argument, when trying to confirm your claim "just like they are credited with design of the Storm, Prizm" etc, I saw no such claim for Storm or Prizm on Wikipedia.

You end w/the statement "While the differences between the Metro and the Swift in the 95-01 model years is small there is enough, for GM to claim the design was theirs".

What I consider 'design' includes the original concept drawings, scale &/or full sized static models & prototypes. When Wikipedia, The Auto Channel/Bill Russ, subcompactculture.com & others claim the '95 Metro was designed by GM's Design Center it's reasonable to expect that those prelimiary tasks were performed by GM. Small differences made to an existing model isn't a new design IMO.

_________________
2000 Chevy Metro 3 cylinder 5 speed 3 door hatch
1998 Chevy Metro 3 cylinder 5 speed 3 door hatch
1998 Chevy Lumina APV
1998 Ford F-150 4X4 XLT
1992 Ford E-150 Club Wagon Chateau
1991 SAAB 900S 5 speed
1987 SAAB 900 Turbo SPG
1985 SAAB 900 Turbo SPG
1974 SAAB Sonett III
1971 SAAB 96 modified to 1980 specs
1966 SAAB 96
1960 SAAB 93F
1958 SAAB 93B
1964 Willys JEEP CJ-5
1954 Willys JEEP M-170 military ambulance
1953 Grumman Kurbside step van


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 8 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group