Nash / Hudson Metro Converts= Good Investment?
![[Deleted User]](https://www.openforum.hetclub.org/applications/dashboard/design/images/defaulticon.png)
Not sure what the gas mileage is on these little cars but I would think that it is pretty good. With the price of gas the way it is, one has never seen so many new Hybrids and new dinky electric cars driving around.
I would think that a cute old convertable (or hardtop) that gets great gas mileage would be a good option for someone that wants good mileage and some fun. Alot cheaper than the alternative new car. Just thinking out loud.
I would think that a cute old convertable (or hardtop) that gets great gas mileage would be a good option for someone that wants good mileage and some fun. Alot cheaper than the alternative new car. Just thinking out loud.
0
Comments
-
Well Niels I never really think of most cars as an investment, howver I do get your line of thinking! Most of the new "effiecient" cars are dinky little ugly things with no space and no personality and too expensive. As far as your Nash/Hudson Metro's though my observation is that those are a car with more of a cult following than an attraction to the larger old car hobby. The Hudson versions are rarer. But then again, you see Gas hit $5 a gallon and us old car buffs might have to give a serious second look to those little cast iron wonders that were ahead of their time.0
-
Yup. Just thinking that for the money, you can buy a good running version for less than a new motorscooter. I think any car that gets very good mileage will be a bit more desirable.
I try not to buy cars that lose money...0 -
Im not to sold on Metropolitans , I just redid one for my lady friend -no way its a usable car in stock form, they are Hudson in name only . I put a Nissan motor with auto trans , plus dual master cylinder power brakes which made it into alot better car . I still need an MG Midget rear end - the Metro rear has 4.55 gears , but it still gets real good milage,0
-
Ken U-Tx wrote:After working on Mets for 5 years at Kip Motor, I can tell you, they break in places you least expect, like the front hollow spindles snapping off so the brake drum and wheel come off. They also rust well. The Austin 1300 and 1500 engines are so so, they need frequent valve jobs on unleaded gas unless you have hard ex inserts installed. They only have 3 speeds, and are low geared for more peppy accelleration from the 40-50 HP motors they had. They are NOT freeway or highway cars. They are city/ town get about cars, as witness the "Metropolitan" nameplate. The original Zenith carbs are usually in bad shape. Steering components are often worn, or on the earlier cars, broken. I guess if you like constantly having to fix things, and have another daily driver to use, a Met is a fair toy. I personally know too much about them to consider owning one. Kenneth
Great point on the mechanicals and no freeway driving. OK- I'll stick with the Hornet Coupes and a bicycle...0 -
There's always the Jet0
-
464Saloon wrote:There's always the Jet
That's what I was gonna suggest...
stay away from Met's.... they sound like they are not worth the aggrivation. At least with the jet, you got a 202, and possible twin H, all you got to do is get past the styling, and if you were considering the Met for even a second, that should not be an issue. The Jet's grow on you after a while, not my cup of tea, but I could easily consider a cool 2 door jet.
Stateline, nice modifications on the Met...0 -
Mets are great little cars! Hell, when the tornado struck my house and shop five years ago, the only thing that was virtually untouched was my little Met! Besides, if the MG engine is such a (potential) problem, there are several very doable 4-cylinder engines that will go in there without butchering the car - the 4-cyl Nissan Diesel, the Ford 2.3L, Chrysler 2.2L, GM 2.4L...the list goes on! My car had been parked for over 20 years, and with a carb overhaul, complete brake overhaul, and tires, it was a running, driving machine...With the "crappy" MG engine! Besides, you can put any MG speed part on this car and have a really FUN car, along with an MG Midget 3.62 rear axle (stock Met was either 4.1 or 4.5!!!)
I wish I had not traded off my Met and the parts car three years ago!
Of just over 100K Mets built, there is an estimated 12K still on the road and at least that in parts cars that still exist - far more percentage than most!
www.hoosiermets.com0 -
Sounds like a Metropolitan wouldn't be too bad of a antique car that used the "back roads" on a pleasant weather weekend trip to a not too distant car show. Doesn't sound like the vehicle you want to be driving in heavy traffic, however. And, one wonders how safe you'd be in an accident. I bet most (admittedly not all) new small cars, despite their lack of much styling, are safer in a wreck than a "Met" or for that matter even most other small or big 50+ year old cars even with seat-belts installed. Note that a vehicle over 50 years old, with few exceptions, doesn't have a padded dash, shock absorbing steering wheel, head rests, seat belts, side and frontal air bags, a built-in front engine "crumple zone", blunt dash knobs/controls, and strategically located fuel tanks to lessen the chance of a rupture in the event of a collision. To be honest, I'd rather be involved in a vehicle accident in my 2002 Toyota Camry than my '50 Pacemaker. I'm not suggesting we abandon driving our Hudsons or for that matter, Metropolitans, as there's a safety risk in just walking across the street. It's just to put into perspective the greater risks involved with driving a small or even large antique car.
Dan0 -
I drive them because they are FUN. If I was to be a safety worrywart, I'd never leave the house!
Life is full of risks. Driving anything is one of them. Might as well enjoy the ride and not worry about the lack of a damn airbag or seat belts!0 -
You can cram more MET's into a driveway than just about any other car, lol. Here's a photo courtesy the HAMB.0
-
With a few up grades I dont think they are unsafe , they are about as solid as newer small cars . the rear center cross member is in the right spot to install seat belts . installing them is a 20 miniute job. I havent pulled the head liner yet to see about shoulder harness installation . Id hate the wreck one -but that goes for any car0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- 37K All Categories
- 113 Hudson 1916 - 1929
- 20 Upcoming Events
- 93 Essex Super 6
- 28.6K HUDSON
- 575 "How To" - Skills, mechanical and other wise
- 995 Street Rods
- 151 American Motors
- 180 The Flathead Forum
- 49 Manuals, etc,.
- 78 Hudson 8
- 44 FORUM - Instructions and Tips on using the forum
- 2.8K CLASSIFIEDS
- 608 Vehicles
- 2.2K Parts & Pieces
- 77 Literature & Memorabilia
- Hudson 1916 - 1929 Yahoo Groups Archived Photos