Click above for more pics of the Dough Heffron's 75 mpg "tandem" Metro
Like a number of other folks who didn't get much attention at the time, Doug Heffron was worried about gas mileage and pump costs way back in 1993. That was back when this particular blogger had a VW Jetta that could be filled to the tippy top for $11, and having to spend $13 was considered criminal banditry. But Doug wasn't happy with merely cheap fill-ups and 56 mpg in his Geo Metro Xfi. So he turned it into the car you see above.
That meant installing tandem seating on the left side, fairing the wheels, changing the gearing, and chopping off the right side and replacing it with, well, nothing but a wing. Once finished, the car got 75 pg. All that work might sound like a lot for an extra 19 mph, but one should expect a bit of aero tweaking and math to squeeze a 34-percent gain in fuel economy from an already frugal econobox.
The car was driven for two years in all four New England seasons, and then gas prices went down and it was put away in a barn. In 2006, however, the barn doors opened again, but Doug hasn't said what he plans to do with the car. We're not saying that everyone should drive this type of... thing, but if a guy in his garage can crank out something like this, then... come on Chevy Volt! Thanks for the tip, Ted!
[Source: Doug Heffron via Cars You Like]
Paris Preview: Officially Official, Honda's new hybrid is the Insight!
Mazda Kiyora city car concept, MX-5 facelift head to Paris
Leaked: Official updated Mazda MX-5 image
Reader Spy: Chevy Volt caught on set of Transformers 2
Spy Shot: Production interior of Chevy Volt (maybe)
In the Autoblog Garage: 2009 Jaguar XF Supercharged
By the Numbers - August 2008: New Digs Edition
In the Autoblog Garage: KITT Shelby GT500 KR
First Drive: 2009 Cadillac CTS-V
In the Autoblog Garage: 2009 Nissan Murano
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
Allan @ Jun 16th 2008 11:35AM
"Once finished, the car got 75 pg. All that work might sound like a lot for an extra 19 mph"
I thought you guys had an editor?
John @ Jun 16th 2008 11:52AM
Nope they got it right. Its now the fastest Geo Metro EVER! j/k
Still 75mpg is pretty damned impressive. Imagine if automakers actually started THINKING a bit. We could have 40mpg full size trucks and 90mpg minivans!
Yar @ Jun 16th 2008 12:58PM
"We could have 40mpg full size trucks"
Well, we have those darn laws of physics we have to get around, and emissions laws.
icu812ru469 @ Jun 16th 2008 1:08PM
Wow... you living in StarTrek universe? 40mpg for a truck? Made of what, plastic? Not just physics is at play here... finance too.
John @ Jun 16th 2008 1:23PM
Wait, you mean we don't have phasers and teleporters and Scotties? Damn.
Ok, so maybe I stretched it a bit. Still, a bit of abnormal thinking can produce a lot of impressive things.
Dan @ Jun 16th 2008 2:04PM
"Let's remove half the passenger compartment to reduce weight and drag" isn't abnormal thinking, it's straight forward compromise like every other design decision.
That this wasn't done at the factory isn't because the squares there didn't think of it, it's because it's not a compromise paying customers are lined up to buy.
71cuda @ Jun 16th 2008 11:51AM
All that work might sound like a lot for an extra 19 mph...
but now he can keep up with traffic on the highway.
Jared @ Jun 16th 2008 11:57AM
So how much money did he spend on the conversion and how much did he save on gas. I'd be surprised if the gas saved was less than the cost involved.
Alex @ Jun 16th 2008 12:04PM
I don't think saving fuel was his only motivation. This guy had an idea and the proper tools and figured, "why not?"
If only he lowered the roof line too...
John R @ Jun 16th 2008 12:07PM
Its just a guess, but I imagine if this guy uses this thing for all of 2008 it will have paid for itself 2x over.
Parkerman @ Jun 16th 2008 12:10PM
If he did his own work... Then it wouldn't cost a whole lot. Alot cheaper than a Prius. And to think how much money he would have saved if he had driven it up until now.. That would be crazy.
A car like this can not be made in todays times though. Alot of people criticize the Smart car for not getting better gas mileage than the metro... But, with the metro, you didn't have to have a 5 star crash rating form every side.. top and bottom with 50 different kind of airbags deploying in any given direction.
Pacman @ Jun 16th 2008 1:08PM
Parkerman - People give the smart a hrad time for getting the same fuel economy as a Honda Fit but being slower, only having two doors, no cargo room. People expect with all the compromises you get with the smart that it should at least give you class leading MPG (compared to currently available vehicles)
Yar @ Jun 16th 2008 6:09PM
THERE CAN BE ONLY ONE!
That being said, I have little concern for which one gets the ax...
Alex @ Jun 16th 2008 11:58AM
uggh... first, change you name. second, go away.
rsfourever @ Jun 16th 2008 12:01PM
or he could just buy a motorcycle.... would be just as practical.
Brill @ Jun 16th 2008 12:49PM
"New England seasons,"
it could get a bit interesting come winter.
John @ Jun 16th 2008 12:17PM
Don't know where you live, but in New England, as in the Midwest, after about October, and until about the middle of April, Motorcycles disappear from the streets. So this is much more practical than a Bike.
Alex @ Jun 16th 2008 12:42PM
Unless you are pushing a scooter, its unlikely that you'll reach this kind of MPG. Of the three bikes i've owned (Scrambler, FZR1000, KLR 250) only the KLR broke into the high 50s. As effecient as motorcycles are, this has them beat.
not to mention rain...
Gregg @ Jun 16th 2008 12:14PM
And on top of all the fuel savings, it is such an attractive conversion as well.
Jason @ Jun 16th 2008 12:17PM
Goes to show what can be accomplished if you're willing to sacrifice modern safety and comforts. I always wondered what could be accomplished with modern engine technology on a REALLY small and light car. I wish automakers could design a bare bones small car that doesn't have to meet the modern safety requirements (to save weight). As long as they made it clear to the consumer upfront that it doesn't meet all the safety requirements I see nothing wrong with it. Imagine what kind of MPG numbers you could get.
On second thought, I guess I just described a few of the cars that are being developed for the emerging markets in India/China. They should sell some of those cars over here. I'm sure there are people crazy enough to sacrifice modern safety for 75-80 mpg.