Didn't John say that he has one of these in BRIGHT PINK, so he can tool around in it with
his Bugz Bunny Krum - Enkrusted Plush Toy...??? It IS a "girly car", after all...
http://oldcarbrochures.com/static/NA/Metropolitan/1955_Metropolitan/1955_Nash_Metropolitan_Foldout/dirindex.html
These are still popular for parade use...
Not my bag really, but it's decently - priced for a collectible, a nice one can be had for around $15K:
https://www.hemmings.com/classifieds/cars-for-sale/nash/metropolitan
More:
https://www.allpar.com/threads/nash-metropolitan-the-first-american-subcompact.228284/
"Sales were low at first, Nash Metropolitan, possibly because the Metropolitan was marketed specifically
to women (its first spokesman was 1954's "Miss America"); other cars marketed to women also failed,
most notably the Dodge LaFemme.
Like the moder Mini and Fiat 500, the Metropolitan was not marketed as an economy car, but as an
economical premium car, ideal for commuting; its size was designed to allow for European sales,
where traditional American cars were rapidly dying out because of their size.
Floyd Clymer brought a 1957 Nash Metropolitan 1500 up Pikes Peak, and famed reviewer Tom
McCahill wrote that it was "a fleet, sporty little bucket." Motor Trend achieved 30 mpg in traffic,
and 27 mpg at a steady 60 mph; cornering, steering, and general feel were highly rated, though
ride on rough roads was criticized. Quality was claimed to be surprisingly high.
In 1962, AMC dropped the Metropolitan. Between Nash, AMC, and Hudson, they had sold 94,986
of the Hudson, AMC, and Nash Metropolitans, enough to finally wear out the tooling, not enough
to make the Metropolitans a common sight at car shows. The Metropolitan never came close to
the Nash Rambler. Had they held on until 1973, AMC would have been seen as prescient; but it
is not likely that the company ever recovered even the modest $2 million development cost of
the original Metropolitan, and it seems likely that they only kept the car going because the
tooling was already paid for..."
</>