2011 Honda CR-Z

englishpete · February 2010

http://gas2.org/2010/02/08/european-honda-cr-z-hybrid-gets-better-gas-mileage-tw- - o-extra-seats/

nippononly · February 2010

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! :-)

englishpete · February 2010

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.

bb49 · February 2010

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.

englishpete · February 2010

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:

nippononly · February 2010

(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....

bb49 · February 2010

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.

englishpete · February 2010

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

nippononly · February 2010

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.

hpmctorque · February 2010

"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.

bb49 · February 2010

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.

nippononly · 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.

englishpete · February 2010

Hi in reply to the last two posts, the 0 to 60 is important because its a gauge to the power from the engine and also the agility of the chassis.
Its 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 doesnt 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.

http://www.insideline.com/honda/cr-z/honda-cr-z-priced-in-japan-from-25500.html

http://www.nitrobahn.com/news/done-mugen-tunes-the-honda-cr-z-hybrid-coupe/

bb49 · March 2010

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.

hpmctorque · March 2010

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.

englishpete · 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

nippononly · 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.....

http://www.autonews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20100308/OEM03/303089966/1117- -

bb49 · March 2010

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.

nippononly · March 2010

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....

bb49 · March 2010

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.

nippononly · March 2010

Well, people are speculating that its price will be that high based on direct currency exchanges with its overseas price.

But Honda originally announced they would target a $20K price point for this car, and since it is basically a 3-door Insight with a few extra bits and a better engine, I think they will get close to that mark. Almost everything in it will come off the Insight or out of the Fit.

At $25K they will sell almost none, and I suspect they know that. Just look at all the good $25K choices, all with the same sporty character and two more useable seats, not to mention all much faster off the line.

bb49 · March 2010

You could be right, however even Motor Trend which seem to be very positive of the CR-Z is stating mid 20's for the price. I also recall Honda stating it would be slotted above the Insight and since the Insight prices are around $20,000-23,000,- it would seem that the CR-Z would be priced above the Insight.

I agree with you if I am correct about the price Honda will not sell very many of them--however, judging by the questionable decisions that were made when Honda developed the CR-Z-- Honda may actually believe then can easily see the 15,000 units for $25,000+.

hpmctorque · March 2010

Well, it must excite some people...

"SAN FRANCISCO (MarketWatch) -- 'Honda Motor Co.'s /quotes/comstock/!7267 (JP:7267 3,270, +25.00, +0.77%) /quotes/comstock/13*!hmc/quotes/nls/hmc (HMC 36.13, -0.17, -0.46%) CR-Z hybrid sports car has drawn more than 7,000 orders only two weeks since its Feb. 26 debut, according to a report Friday. The Nikkei business daily reported that the orders represent about 60% of the annual sales target for the car of 12,000 units. The CR-Z, a gasoline-electric hybrid, can travel up to 25 kilometers (15 miles) on a liter (0.26 gallons) of gas, according to the report.' "

nippononly · March 2010

Of course, that's in Japan, where they will sell a tiny-engined 60 mpg CRZ.

Hold the base price to $19,995 Honda!

bb49 · March 2010

It would be interesting to see if this sales trend continues. However, Japan is a totally different market then here. I read the latest test drive by Motor Trend basically the reviewer found it to be very responsive, however, he never once stated he was impressed with the power or speed of the car. Over all the article was not very critical of the CR-Z except for he noted the Golf TDI outperformed the CR-Z. Judging from the article this was not really true test drive as we still don't have any real 0-60 times etc,. (and of course Honda is not going to provide them as it know it will only impress anyone). The reviewer states the car did 0-60 in 9 seconds flat making it sound like it was an actual timed speed but the spec chart states the 0-60 times is an estimate. Interestingly, the same article on a UK blog's chart states the 0-62 was 10.1 second (estimated).. Based upon all of the foregoing and the Japan test drive 0-62 times-- I think it is pretty safe to assume that at best the 0-60 times will be in the mid 9 second range. Which of course just confirms what eveyone has been saying-- that the CR-Z is slow.

bb49 · March 2010

I meant so say that Honda is not stating the 0-60 times because it (Honda) knows that the time will not impress anyone,

nippononly · March 2010

but Honda has put up the preliminary specs for the CRZ:

http://cr-z.honda.com/specifications/

They list it with a curb weight that misses the 2500-pound target curb weight by about 8%, with the MT at 2670 pounds.

However, it will make 128 lb-ft of torque at 1000 rpm. That is the same as the '94-'01 Integra which weighed the same, but at 1000 rpm instead of the 4000 rpm the Integra achieved it at. That ought to make for decent launches.

Indeed, the Integra only made about 18 more horses, and that was a very fun car to drive, still is. And it made maybe 30-31 mpg on a really good day, which will be about 10 less than what the CRZ will do, by my guess.

Plus, the base CRZ won't be the cheap-out model that the base Insight is, in fact I am thinking there isn't much I would want from the EX, certainly nothing I would pay extra for. I dislike HIDs and NAV, wouldn't pay a nickel for those. That just leaves aluminum pedals and shifter and a subwoofer, stuff I can easily put in myself at any time if I am so inclined.

So if the base CRZ is priced at $19,995, it is still at the top of my list. I realize lots of people want lots of different things out of this car, so YMMV.

nippononly · April 2010

2011 Honda CR-Z first drive: We couldn't wait, so we drove one in Japan

Honda must be happy with itself right now. The recently released CR-Z hybrid sports-eco car has racked up 10 times the sales Honda was expecting, with 10,000 cars being snapped up at dealerships across Japan

......A 113-hp, 1.5-liter VTEC powers the car. That might not sound exciting, but with a 13-hp electric motor assisting low-rpm response, the little Honda offers adequate acceleration. The metal-hydride battery pack under the trunk space supplies the voltage powering the flywheel-mounted brushless motor, supplying 58 lb-ft of torque instantly, allowing us to zip through Tokyo traffic effortlessly.

There are sport, normal and eco modes, with eco decreasing throttle response to boost fuel economy. The six-speed manual was a pleasure, offering a short and precise stroke--typical Honda. We also drove the CVT-equipped car, which is marginally more economical, returning 58.8 mpg compared with the manual's 53.0 mpg. These are Japanese figures, so don't expect cars to be quite so economical in the real world. During our drive through town, we averaged 35 mpg, a respectable figure considering Tokyo's clogged streets.

The CR-Z shares most underpinnings with the Insight but boasts a shorter wheelbase and wider front and rear tracks. The CR-Z comes alive in corners, but it might be a little too stiff for the daily commute. The car is quiet at low rpm and shuts off at stops.

http://www.autoweek.com/article/20100414/CARREVIEWS/100419951

I still have a lot of hope for this car, although I do wish they would offer here the 4-seat version they are making for Japan. Having two back seats, however small, is so helpful for those occasional times I need to cram a third person in my car.

tifighter · April 2010

This link is for you, Nippon...

englishpete · April 2010

Hi thanks for the link, very interesting I like the comparison with the Scirocco, the interior certainly looks good and I think Honda have done a better job than VW in this department, thats not to say the Scirocco is not comfortable but they have used the Golf GTI dash and seats but should have done something special.
As to performance I assume they are comparing the CRZ with the less powerful 140 TDI (140 bhp) thats slower than the 170 TDI that I drive, even so my money would be on the Scirocco.
Will have to test drive the CRZ in June when they will be available just to see what I have missed it certainly sounds interesting but I will not be trading in my Scirocco.
Will post how the test drive goes.

On another note see an old CRX today it still has style and it gave a good account of its self but he could not catch me.

nippononly · April 2010

Great video, thanks tifighter!!

I think I will be driving mine in sport mode all the time, and since we don't get the Scirocco in the States, I'm wracking my brain thinking of anything this really competes with head to head.

I guess the base Mini Cooper would be it. $20K base price, 117 hp, 0-60 in under 9 seconds, rated 28/37 for the manual. And a back seat, which the CRZ doesn't have. If Mini can pull those numbers from their car without diesel or hybrid parts, why can't Honda? :confuse:

But I still like the looks of this thing enough to be first in line for a test drive come fall.....there are a lot of things I dislike about the Mini's interior, which is where one spends all of one's time when driving, of course.

Edit...of course the other competitor which pretty much goes head to head is the Golf TDI, which at $24K is several thousand dollars more, but which has better acceleration and fuel economy to make up for it. That will be a good back-to-back, Mini vs CRZ vs Golf TDI. I bet the other two have VW beat in the handling department by a goodly margin....

tifighter · April 2010

I like the CR-Z. Don't forget that the Golf TDI does come with the GTI suspension settings in the US, so its more of a handler than a bog standard Golf or base Jetta. I'd take either over a Mini, I think.

Also, I 'm going to guess that the CR-Z will start in the low 20's, so it will split the two in cost. The dollar hasn't gained on the yen for awhile now, but I'd like to be wrong.

nippononly · April 2010

Yeah, but even the GTI drives like a well-controlled heavy car, which is what it is. The Mini drives like it's small and light, and I expect the Honda to do the same. And that's the feel I prefer.

And if the CRZ ends up being a letdown, I will probably end up in a Mini next year, with all the unwanted bright bits in the interior, and the annoying toggle switches and the pie-sized center speedo next to my knee, about four yards BELOW my line of sight.

But if I have to write off the CRZ, I WILL give the Golf TDI a look-see.

englishpete · April 2010

Hi do you not get the Golf GTD in the US it has the 170 engine that i have and it goes like hell but the same fuel economy as the lesser engine

nippononly · April 2010

Our Golf TDI has 140 hp, not the 170 you get. Apart from that, it has most of the chassis upgrades of the gas GTI, so it handles pretty well, but it is better for highway cruising than canyon carving. I believe the iron diesel engine is heavier than the gas engine too, so there's more weight over the front axle.

One other dark horse for my next car is the new Fiesta. I will check one out when they become available in the summer, and they are supposed to handle well but have a lousy shifter. One thing I just can't abide is a lousy shifter. :-/

englishpete · April 2010

Cant believe your only choice is the 140 its so slow, (you can get a 140 re-mapped to 170 here and the 170 to 200) on the Scirocco the weight difference between petrol and diesel is 22 kilos (just under 50 pounds) so not massive.
Just looked at the price of a fiesta here you will get two Fiestas for the price of a CRZ in the UK.
A Focus ST-2 is the same price as the base CRZ, if your thinking of one of these it will leave the CRZ at the side of the road wile its still trying to engage first gear but it might not do much for fuel economy.

nippononly · May 2010

the latest article on Honda at Auto Observer? Expectations are low of Honda at present, and the CRZ is no exception. :-(

Edit: how did this get to the Hybrid Vehicles board? It belongs in Future Vehicles, which it still is.....

Kirstie_H · May 2010

we're doing some shifting, that's all.

bb49 · May 2010

I still believe this car needs more power and no one, even Honda, would call this car fast. This car merits would seem to rest almost entirely upon its supposed "sports car" handling--it may not deliver on this either, as a recent Popular Mechanics review states'...there's lots of body row around corners...the CR-Z is far from the most agile small coupe around--a Mini or a BMW 1 Series would leave it dead on a twisting road".

bb49 · June 2010

I was wondering if you (anyone else) could tell me if anything is amiss in Honda's claim that the CR-Z will deliver its maximum torque (128 lbs) at 1500 rpm. It seems to me that the gasoline engine would need more rpms than 1500 to deliver its maximum torque and the electric motor's torque is not enough to make up the difference.

englishpete · June 2010

Well at last I have seen and sat in a CRZ must say I am impressed with the interior, soft luxurious grey leather although not supportive, the dash looks good to.
In the UK we get a rear seat this is black cloth and blends into the back shelf.
The rear seat is nothing to write home about and would only be suitable for a small child to sit in but ok for dumping the odd bag. Boot space is at a premium because of the batteries under the floor
The car its self gets a second look the dealer had one in white and one in black but the white looks better.
The GT model is £19,000 but I would guess you could negotiate a good discount as you can get a Scirocco (all be it a base model) for this price.

No I have yet to have a drive and as I am off on holiday to Turkey tomorrow for two weeks so I will have to wait but I have been promise a test drive even though there is not much chance of me buying one.

tifighter · June 2010

I just got back from Osaka where I saw quite a few of these on the road. Clearly, Japan has embraced it, which is probably not too surprising. I have to say, it does look a lot better in person, particularly in a rather nice shade a blue that I saw.

tifighter · June 2010

Honda has released CR-Z pricing today.

nippononly · July 2010

is how I would characterize it, based on the first published instrumented tests of the U.S. version that I have seen (was in C&D, or might have been R&T, this month), which clocked it at 8.8 seconds 0-60 with the 6-speed.

Not fast enough to run with proper sport coupes, but just right to be a commute car that isn't boring to drive (like my current one is)......and being only a 2-seater, I only need one other person in it to qualify for the carpool lane and reduced toll on the bridges......

bb49 · July 2010

There is potential problem for those of us expecting to drive this car for the "sportiness" as I think we would all agree that in order for the CR-Z to have any sportlike acceleration at all that it needs the additional torque and hp from the electric motor. Thus, if you manage to deplete the battery as a few of the test driver's managed to do, the electric motor shuts off and the CR-Z is left to flounder with its low hp gasoline engine alone. Since, the CR-Z would never be called fast (I still think its too underpowered and I can't believe Honda gave it so little power and still promote it as a sporty car) what you're a left with is an even slower slow car.

Of course, Honda could have easily avoided this problem it it had done the smart thing and forego the hybrid system altogether. Or if it had to be a hybrd--Honda should have given at a gasoline engine that produced at least 180 hp.

nippononly · July 2010

I think the problem here is that Honda is sticking with a hybrid technology that is a dud - just look at the Camry hybrid - 190ish hp and still makes 31/34. That's basically the same fuel economy as this CRZ, which is half the size and weighs 1000 pounds less! And imagine what this car would drive like with 190 hp!!

Yes, if they had just put the 1.8L gas engine in it from the Civic, it would probably weigh around 2300 pounds, which combined with the 140 hp would be a really fun car I think. And it would still make 26/34 (the rating of the Civic with the 5-speed) or better - probably better because it would be lighter. And then give it the 6-speed, and you could get that highway number up by another couple of points.

But if Honda had the HSD system that Toyota has, I bet this car could make a solid 50 mpg - Prius is right in this ballpark power-wise, is heavier, and we all know how that one does for mpg.....Honda needs to completely rework its hybrid powertrains until they are competitive with other automakers, and use smaller gas engines for better fuel economy in the meantime.

Imagine the Fit's engine, with an 8000-rpm redline, in the CRZ! I'm thinking 150 hp from a 1.5, with combined fuel economy of 32-33 even without hybrid trickery.....and a 300-pound weight savings as a consequence of not having the hybrid's battery pack in there.

englishpete · August 2010

As any one seen Honda's latest concept to go on sale 2014 its a replacment for the S2000 roadster.
It has a 2lt petrol hybrid engine mid engine rear wheel drive based on a fit chassis but made of aluminium.
Autocar mag 23 June 2010 page 8 (this is a uk publication)

lenthewriter · August 2010

I test drove a black, 6-speed CR-Z yesterday in the rain and came away impressed. With a sticker price of just over $21,000, this car is a bargain! Handling at normal speeds (it was raining, as I said) was tight. Not as stiff as a Civic Si, and not as smooth as an Accord. Surprisingly quick in Sport mode. I'm seriously interested, but don't think I can give up the back seat capacity of my Accord. Or maybe I can....

accordguy0325 · September 2010

I concur as I leased a base CR-Z CVT last month after having a 2010 Fit for a short time and a 2009 Accord coupe prior to that. I am getting almost 42mpg and very much enjoy my CR-Z.

See more Car Pictures at CarSpace.com">

tifighter · September 2010

42 mpg sounds pretty good to me. Enjoy your new ride...

2011 Honda CR-Z

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles