Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

2011 Honda CR-Z



  • hpmctorquehpmctorque Posts: 4,600
    I drove an '07 Civic EX sedan for about one hour, but that was a round trip in the city. I didn't notice a problem with the electric power steering, but that may be because I was just driving the car normally while chatting with the owner, and not testing it. I value good steering feel, so thanks for tipping me off on the EX coupe.

    I'll wait to see some test results before passing judgment on the CR-Z.
  • nippononlynippononly SF Bay AreaPosts: 12,726
    I'm not just talking about the Civic EX's steering, I'm talking also about the soft and squishy handling.

    The slalom numbers will be the most important stat on the CRZ that I will be looking for once it arrives.

    2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)

  • hpmctorquehpmctorque Posts: 4,600
    What vibes do you get on the Fiesta?

    I'd like to see Scion come out with an updated version of the xA, but chances are it won't happen.
  • nippononlynippononly SF Bay AreaPosts: 12,726
    I think Scion is on its way to extinction in a few years' time.

    The Fiesta should offer the CRZ a run for its money in top trim, but that one WON'T get anywhere near the mileage the CRZ will and WILL cost about the same as the CRZ. So then it becomes a question of the looks (kinda prefer the Fiesta) and those back seats (no preference in my case).

    And let's not forget the CRZ will have a Honda shifter, an item unmatched in excellence in the western world! :-)

    2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)

  • nippononlynippononly SF Bay AreaPosts: 12,726
    is reporting 2670 pounds for curb weight: oit-auto-show.html

    Also, the rear end is torsion-beam, not independent. :-(

    This might not be all that I had hoped.

    It might also be cheaper than expected, as a result. That would be a small plus, but I am hoping for a really fun car here....

    2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)

  • hpmctorquehpmctorque Posts: 4,600
    Are you sure the CR-Z will have conventional (hydraulic?) power steering, and not the Insight's electric power steering?
  • nippononlynippononly SF Bay AreaPosts: 12,726
    I thought I read somewhere it would have electro-hydraulic steering, a sort of hybrid of the two, but regardless, if it is electric, they had better do a MUCH better job of providing road feel and steering feedback than they did in the Insight, or it will be a complete non-starter for me.....

    2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)

  • nippononlynippononly SF Bay AreaPosts: 12,726
    seems to be mostly one of disappointment:

    When the Honda CR-Z Concept was presented at the 2009 Tokyo Auto Show last October, the reception among enthusiasts on Edmunds' Inside Line was upbeat and hopeful, with readers offering comments like "Woot!" and "Should get CRAZY high gas mileage!" and "This is the perfect car for me."

    ....Early reactions include, "Color me disappointed" and "They completely butchered the concept " and even "This makes my soul hurt."

    I have to agree wholeheartedly with this one:
    In particular, the design's long front nose draws a series of barbs, including "Holy front overhang Batman!" and "That's one horrid rhinoplasty" and "Literally the ugliest profile shot of a car that I have ever seen."

    The overhang is awful at the front - this is one of those cars like from the 80s that will scrape the front skirt on EVERY driveway, EVERY speed bump...

    As for the performance vs fuel economy, I think we ought to wait and see what it can really do. Because it is pretty impossible to see how fuel economy could be this low in a car as slow as the Insight. I think the manual will be geared very much for speed, and 8 seconds or less to 60 mph might be more the level it's on. Which would be satisactory in a car I could get low 40s mpg in. rom-tokyo-to-detroit.html#more

    2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)

  • hpmctorquehpmctorque Posts: 4,600
    Have you read Edmunds' test of the Fiesta? They're enthusiastic about it. According to Edmunds, the Fiesta sets new benchmarks in some areas for its class, including steering dynamics. Plus, it's up there with the leaders on fuel economy.

    The difference in the annual cost of gasoline between the Fiesta and the CR-Z wouldn't be much.
  • It sounds like Honda might have blown there chances with this car before it hits the road, The fuel figures don’t look good nether the kerb weight think the concept of a hybrid sports might be the undoing of this car.
    The 1.5 v tec engine is a good power unit I had it in my old civic aerodeck but got better mileage than the CRZ and that was heavier. You can have power and economy
    With the power and fuel consumption I get from my new Scirocco 2lt 170 TDI I think Honda might have missed a trick.

    I have seen the CRZ at the 2008 London motor show and it looked good, I loved more the so called S2000 roadster concept (see link) that made its one and only appearance never to be seen again.
    Why do it? make a mockup of a car show it to the public to wet there appetites only to take it away, to me it says “we know what you really want buy but try this half a car instead”. - heerio
  • nippononlynippononly SF Bay AreaPosts: 12,726
    I think he has some of his numbers wrong (like 33 highway EPA for the manual, I believe it's projected to be 37 and none of the numbers are official for the U.S. yet anyway) but regardless of that I am waiting to see some actual driving impressions of this thing. The release date is not far off now, so there should be some magazine test drives soon. I am seeing good press on the new Fiesta and to a lesser extent the Abarth, so I've got some good backups in mind! :-)

    2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)

  • I think your right and we should let the car have a chance to prove its self, the fact that its getting bad press lays at the feet of Honda, they have had this car as a concept to long kept their prospective customers in the dark, changed the way it looks now from its original conception and now it is looking like its not going to live up to its expectations.
    Think Honda need to have a close look their public relations department, how many people like me got fed up with waiting and have been seduced into buying something else.
    The ford focus is certainly a machine to keep your eye on, the ST range looks to be the dogs gonads.
  • bb49bb49 Posts: 21
    I'm still wondering what Honda was thinking when they designed this car. If it was meant to appeal to the car enthusiast looking for an affordable, fun sporty two seater then they don;t really understand the priorities of this type of buyer.

    For the aforementioned buyer the hybrid would be fine as long as it did not mean a sacrifice in performance. Clearly this car is too much of a compromise (9.7 0-62, 122 hp) to satisfy any sportcar enthusiast.

    Sadly,it looks like Honda is abandoning the fun to drive sportscar market.
  • Think you are so right, I find it sad that Honda are abandoning true sports car market especially when you look at what they have made in the past , did this start with the withdrawal from F1 and are they just looking to make cars for the family car market if so why produce the CRZ, this is like watching and old friend become senile. :sick:
  • nippononlynippononly SF Bay AreaPosts: 12,726
    (9.7 0-62, 122 hp)

    The original CRX SI was 90 hp or so, 2000 pounds or so. This one had better clock in around 2500 pounds like they promised, and has 1/3 more horsepower, so should have a better power to weight ratio than the original.

    This model was NEVER a drag racer. We haven't seen a slalom number yet, but I bet it will shame lots of expensive sports and sporty cars.

    And they haven't driven a manual with the NA gearing yet, so 9.7 0-60 is in doubt anyway. I am betting on 8-8.5, which is plenty fast off the line for this model.

    Bottom line is it needs to be really fun to drive, and you can't always predict that by the numbers, which is why I made the earlier remark that we need to see some first drives to get a better sense of this thing at this point....

    2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)

  • bb49bb49 Posts: 21
    I saw photos of the new Odyssey concept. It's looks very sleek and sporty and based upon the previous Odyssey model will handle very well and will probably do 0-60 in the mid- 8 second range or better. Not only will I be as fast or faster than the CR-Z I will be able haul 6 more people and have more drink holders! I think I'll I inform Honda that they don't have worry, just put a split rear window, a shark fin on the roof, maybe a spoiler and a 6 speed manual and call it the Odyssey-Z and myself and all of the other car enthusiasts will have our Honda sports car.
  • Sorry but it does nothing for me, looks like a people carrier nothing sporty here.

    See previous post for the concepts shown in London 2008 Honda OSM
  • nippononlynippononly SF Bay AreaPosts: 12,726
    The Camry V-6 will do 0-60 in like 6 seconds or so. It is also a pig of a vehicle just like the Odyssey, and can't carve a canyon worth a damn.

    Neither has any attributes I am interested in.

    Give me a focused sport package every time. The 0-60 sprint is WAAAY overrated.

    2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)

  • hpmctorquehpmctorque Posts: 4,600
    "The 0-60 sprint is WAAAY overrated."

    Couldn't agree more, nippononly, in the sense that it gets a disproportionate amount of attention and attribution. It's only one factor of total performance.
  • bb49bb49 Posts: 21
    I agree that 0-60 times are only one factor of performance, however,a lot of people do look at a car's 0-60 times (and assuming the 0-60 times are around in th 9.5 range-- I doubt if anyone would be impressed for any car let alone one that has "sporty" aspirations---which is why I think Honda has not released any 0-60 times and is trying to prepare everyone for the fact that this car is underpowered and slow. It also looks like it will be too expensive for this kind of dismal performance as based upon the Japan price the base model may very well be over $25,000.

    The biggest problem with this car is Honda chose to make it a hybrid. A gasoline engine only would have been a much better choice as it would have been faster, cheaper and lighter and if would have been attractive a to wider market than this car which will appeal to very small market.
  • nippononlynippononly SF Bay AreaPosts: 12,726
    edited February 2010
    Well 2-seat sporty cars are almost by definition niche cars - there isn't a one that sells in any serious numbers. Highest sales in 2-seaters is probably Miata which does what, like 20K per year?

    CRX was always a niche car - they sold in small numbers but had a fiercely devoted following. If Honda isn't prepared for CRZ sales to be somewhere below those of Miata, it has made the wrong choice bringing this car back. But I think Honda probably is prepared for that, which is why they have borrowed so much from Insight and Fit to design and build this thing - keeps the costs down.

    And while CVT sprint numbers may be around 9.5 secs to 60 mph, I will bet anyone here $1 that the manual will get there in 8.5 or less. ;-)

    It seems clear to me that the CVT-equipped model is geared for fuel economy just like the Insight that shares its powertrain, but the manual will be geared for quick acceleration I think - hence the low fuel economy numbers by comparison (and they are a LOT lower). Makes you wonder why they didn't build a model with the 1.8 from the Civic - 140 hp would be plenty to make a really light car fast and fun, and it would probably get about the same mileage without all the hybrid hyjinks.

    2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)

  • Hi in reply to the last two posts, the 0 to 60 is important because it’s a gauge to the power from the engine and also the agility of the chassis.
    It’s a shame there is on option for the 1.8 Civic engine and as a non hybrid would be a better seller than the current setup, maybe Honda will consider this at a later date to retrieve sales numbers if this CRZ doesn’t sell.
    Regarding two seater sports being niche car then you should se the amount of Audi TTs, BMW Z4s, Mazda mx5 let alone the number of 4 seater coupes on the UK roads, if the US does not take to this car then I think Europe will take up the short full.
    This providing the CRZ can compete 0 to 60 in 9 seconds is not going to get a look in its slower that the Civic
    The wife bought a new Civic yesterday and they are expecting the CRZ in the show rooms in the summer. It goes on sale next week in Japan and they have 4500 pre sales already so will not be long before we hear more.
    Have a look at the links below new articles are coming every day now.
  • bb49bb49 Posts: 21
    I wholeheartedly agree with everyone who believes Honda should have offered a non-hybrid version, In fact, I'm still puzzled why Honda doesn't offer a non-hybrid version as there really isn't any good reason not to offer a non-hybrid version--and I challenge Honda to justify its (in my opinion full hardy) no offer a non-hybrid version.
  • hpmctorquehpmctorque Posts: 4,600
    Maybe Honda will eventually introduce a lower priced non-hybrid version of the CR-Z, especially if the hybrid isn't well received. Announcing the pure gasoline version now could undermine sales of the hybrid, and not permit Honda to gauge demand accurately.
  • englishpeteenglishpete Posts: 42
    edited March 2010
    Things are beginning to move here in the UK , just had a call from my local Honda dealer asking if I am still interested in the CRZ and would I like to be invited to the opening day for the car. Even though I have deserted to VW they still have offered the invite.
    It will be in the show room on the 5th of June.

    Prices here start at £16,000 for the base model and £19,000 for the GT .same price as the 1.8 Civic
  • nippononlynippononly SF Bay AreaPosts: 12,726
    edited March 2010
    Including the fact that there might some day be a CRZ type-R:

    TOKYO -- Honda Motor Co.'s new CR-Z sporty hybrid is the car that nearly wasn't.

    The wedge-shaped, two-seat hatchback was almost killed twice because engineers weren't convinced it was a unique concept and because U.S. bosses originally didn't want it.

    When Norio Tomobe was appointed chief engineer of the project in the summer of 2004, the car was still a blank sheet. And in the early years, the working model had a traditional gasoline engine.

    .....going hybrid brought its own problems. Today critics assail the CR-Z as neither especially fuel-efficient nor sporty. And Tomobe is quick to admit at least one thing he wishes the CR-Z had: "more horsepower."

    He said he would like a Type R sporty version of the CR-Z someday with a spunkier power-to-weight ratio that lives up to its sporty styling.

    Yessssss!! :-)

    But in the meantime, the CR-Z is an exercise in compromise. It was conceived as a 1.3-liter car for Europe but was given a 1.5-liter engine to appeal to U.S. drivers. It aims to be sporty with a six-speed stick-shift option but also comes in a version with continuously variable transmission to squeeze out extra fuel economy.

    The result: a 122-hp package that delivers a 0-to-62-mph time that, at 9.7 seconds, barely edges the Toyota Prius. And fuel economy is only 36/38 mpg, well below the Prius' 51/48.

    Note that here they are once again quoting the 0-60 for the CVT model. I still hold out hopes that the 6-speed will be significantly faster, and I wonder if the U.S. isn't the only place offering the 6-speed, which is why we don't have 0-60 times for that model yet.

    Tetsuo Iwamura, president of American Honda Motor Co., was skeptical right up until he drove the final prototype.

    "He kept saying they don't need a hybrid," recalled Tomobe.

    "In the American market, people equate hybrids with the Prius," he said of Iwamura's cool response. "If the hybrid is sporty, it's going to confuse the customers and dealers."

    .......While driving early prototypes, Iwamura relentlessly derided the car, Tomobe said. But when he got behind the wheel of the final version, his reaction changed.

    Suddenly, the project was a go.

    .......Tomobe, who cut his teeth as chief engineer on Japanese market projects such as the Mobilio Spike and Elysion minivans, is unapologetic about the CR-Z's compromises.

    "I'm satisfied," he said. "This is what the future of sports cars will be for Honda. We are not pursuing absolute maximum speed. What we aim for is a car that is exhilarating to drive."

    On paper, the CR-Z's power may seem lackluster. But sporty handling makes up for it, Tomobe said. The three-mode drive system helps by delivering extra throttle responsiveness.

    Drivers can select normal, economy or sporty driving modes. In sporty mode, drivers of the CVT can simulate stepped shifting manually by flipping paddle shifters on the steering wheel.

    .......Not only is its engine larger than the Insight's 1.3-liter, but the CR-Z's engine has 16 valves instead of the Insight's eight. This is to help increase power at higher rpm and improve efficiency at lower speeds.

    Up to 2,300 rpm, one intake valve per cylinder is closed to limit fuel consumption. Above that, all four valves are working to optimize power.

    The CR-Z is also the first Honda hybrid to get a six-speed manual transmission

    You ready for the sad part?

    Critics say Honda could score by offering a gasoline-only CR-Z. But Tomobe said the company has ruled that out. The car's identity is too closely linked to being a hybrid, he said.

    ......Said Tomobe: "The CR-Z is supposed to be an intelligent sports car."

    So it seems like it's a hybrid first, a sporty car second, despite what they are saying. :-(

    When you look at the stats, it does pretty poorly as a hybrid:

    Hybrids head-to-head: Specs of Honda and Toyota hybrids
    Honda CR-Z 122hp, 36/38 mpg (CVT); 31/37 (manual)
    Honda Insight 98 hp 40/43 mpg
    Honda Civic Hybrid 110 hp, 40/45
    Toyota Prius 98 hp 51/48

    And that's before you even throw in the respective weights, of which CRZ is the lightest.

    Generally, a car that doesn't know what it is trying to be ends up being no better than average at most things, which is what I'm afraid of with this car. It does look, though, like it will hit just about the right spot for what I need in a commute car. It would be nice to have a commute car that is also fun to drive. So we will see..... -

    2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)

  • bb49bb49 Posts: 21
    There are two positive statements in this article: 1) that Tomobe wished it had more horse power;2) the possibility of an higher powered R version. And the article pointed out that this car is a compromise (now that's a huge understatement). Unfortunately I have many issues with the rest of the article. It worries me that Tomobe states he was" satisfied" with the result (how in the world can he be satisfied with such a slow car (and of course this is why Honda does not disclose the 0-60 times) that does not get all that great gas mileage. Furthermore, his explanation on why he decided against a gasoline version is clearly and an attempt to put "spin" on a questionable decision. I mean seriously does he really think anyone would buy the statement that the car was too closely identified with a hybrid and that was the reason not to do a gasoline only version. This is pure b.s. he could have just offered a hybrid version and a gasoline version.

    I am further appalled by his statement that this is the future of Honda sports cars--if this is the future (ie. slow, poor performing, expensive hybrids) then I don't want to be part of this dismal future.

    Finally, what does he mean the CR-Z is suppose to be an" intelligent sports car"? .
    Does this mean a non-hybrid sportscar like a Ferrari is a "dumb sports car"? Or is he saying that people who want a non-hybrid sports car with more horse power and speed are stupid?
    While I appreciate Mr. Tomobe explaining the CR-Z, I still remain unconvinced that the right decisions were made for this car.

    The jury is still out as to whether enough buyers will be willing to pay $25,500 - 28,000r for such a sadly lacking car.
  • nippononlynippononly SF Bay AreaPosts: 12,726
    in the world of $50K sports cars, the Lotus Elise was "sadly underpowered" too. Yet it was a delight to drive and outhandled everything in the field. On anything but a straight circuit, it would give cars costing twice as much a run for their money.

    That might be how the CRZ is a "smart" sporty coupe. For $20K, you won't find anything to outhandle it, and I can believe that even with 120 hp it could be a lot of fun to drive if the handling and the high-revving engine are there.

    The problem is the remark you referred to earlier: that the car will be "too closely identified with hybrids" to offer a gasoline engine. This is marketing-speak (which right away is a bad sign for CRZ and indeed for Honda as a whole) for "we want to sell more hybrids and nobody bought the Civic hybrid because they couldn't tell it apart from the gas Civics". So basically, this is their second Prius-fighter (with even worse mileage than the FIRST Prius-fighter, the Insight! What a joke), and sport comes a distant second.

    So we will see what they produce. It could be a very fun little sport coupe, and I feel I should reiterate that there really isn't much you can buy for $20K that is genuinely fun to drive. The closest thing would be the Miata (or the GTI depending on your preferred poison), both of which are $5000 more to buy.

    The problem would be if the FIT gives it a run for its money. For $3000 less to buy and only a small hit for mileage, I would just go with the Fit probably....

    2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)

  • bb49bb49 Posts: 21
    Would your opinion be different if the CR-Z cost more than 20K? It will probably be more in the $25,500-$28,000 range which would place in the Miata, WRX and Mazdaspeed 3 territory all which will easily outperform the CR-Z.
Sign In or Register to comment.