2011 Honda CR-Z Debuts - Another Honda Fail?

there is nothing wrong with "bashing" another car that does not fit one's needs. this is human nature and only reinforces in one's mind the validity of the ultimate purchase choice.

obviously the honda is a fine automobile and many will probably enjoy it but it is not for everyone and there is no problem letting anyone know that

 

They found out the HV packs were dying faster for the Manual transmission due to driver abuse with deep discharges. They probably made a change to prevent that and caused MPG drop. I guess CVT version with computer does a much better job, hence increasing MPG.

EPA test changed since then as well.

 

it seems they did the vehicle just to have "hybrid" sporty coupe. Thats very wrong way to go around it - you should add hybrid powertrain to vehicle because it makes it better, not because it gives it better marketing... because people attracted to it will see 34 mpg and think what exactly?

i think everyone would have been happier if they did exactly the same car, and had standard 1.5l engine from Fit sport. Since car would weight 10-15% less than Fit sport, it would be faster, get better mpg and have attractive price.

Now you have 18k-20k Hybrid Sports car that goes 0-62 in 10 seconds and gets 34-35 mpg... it simply does nothing right.

On the other hand, imagine HSD from Prius, in smaller coupe and 2 seat interior... 2800 lbs and 160-170hp for 40 MPG average. Someone could see point in that, even if it is tiny portion of the market.

Thats why Toyota is going with FT-86, which is low weight, rwd sports car which should get >30 MPG.

 

First an ugly "crossover" with pitiful styling and gas mileage and now a 2 seater hybrid with MPG rating only in the 30s? Wth are you thinking Honda? You get an F.

 

I owned a 1988 CRX-HF. The acceleration was slow (0-60 mph in 14 tries....errr seconds), handling was so so (p165 13" tires), but the MPG's were great 50+ mpg (and I could get near 60 mpg on long road trips).

This new CRX looks nice and will definitely appeal to some demographics. While the Fit is out there, back in the day, we did have the Civic hatchback out at the same time as the Civic CRX and I would think that same demographic that would have chosen an old CRX rather than a civic hatchback would choose a new CRX vs a Fit. (When I first saw the Fit, I thought it was a modernized version of the civic hatchback....still do think that).

My wish for Honda would be to have at least 2 trims of CRX. One sporty (SI) much like they are showing with the autoshow SANS hybrid. A second that is a hybrid that really pushes the MPG envelope (HF). The latter still may not be able to match the Prius, but if it got close, you'd get a bunch of people that want a cool looking car that also gets great MPG. This would be different that the Insight crowd.

The Insight should have been their uber MPG car, but Honda missed the mark with it.

That's what I don't get......What is Honda's strategy? How is the Insight different than the CRX? The CRX is a bit sportier? Me thinks that they really need to have some separation between the two cars. CRX = sporty. Insight = max MPG. Civic hybrid = ?

 

Couple of observations:

The CR-Z is too big to really be compared to the CRX Si

Sports hybrids are not going to get 40mpg with current technology - except maybe a Mini

 

Mercedes is moving to all its vehicles hybrid too (some like this but with 20hp electrics and lithium batteries, and some 2 stage hybrids). The problem isn't ima, this has tangible benefits. It provides low end torque so that a rough engine is smoother. It allows for engine shut off at lights while keeping the ac running (my favorite feature of the prius), it also adds a big boost of city fe with regenerative braking. The civic hybrid is less than 200lbs more than the standard civic and this ima has a lighter battery and motor.

Where did the 10 seconds come from? If that's true, its awful. The year old rumor was 2800lbs (a little heavier) but with the civic 1.8l making 140hp. That would have been a much better performing car. I did see a leaked 9.7 to 100kph but that was with 50mpg equivalent.

The fit sport gets 29mpg. I don't see how you can shave 250lbs (10%) from it without adding extra costs (toyota replaced the hood and hatch with aluminum, tesla uses carbon fiber). Drop the fit engine in the current design and lose the hybrid, and I doubt you'd sell many. No it needs more power, and maybe a type -r or si will come around. Or make it a real miller cycle and add a supercharger to the 1.5 engine, a honda speed hybrid.

I think that electric flywheel design is better for a sporty inexpensive car. The feel of a fixed gear (even if its fake with paddle shifters) is missing from the prius. 170 hp in the current hsd, still won't feel quite right, but...throw a 150hp motor in(they have one in the camery), add a 2 or 3 kwh lithium battery to drive it (let me plug it in), turbo that 1.8 liter and put it in a small light (other than hybrid components) well handling car, and you have a winner. Add some control of regen so it can have driver friendly power bands so it handles the twisties too. I don't think toyota has a sporty fun to drive car in them, but maybe with them licensing techonolgy to mazda we will see a mazdaspeed hit 35mpg instead of 25.

 

Please wait until you drive a CR-Z to fail it. I have been in the car, around the car, and looked under the CR-Z. It is a very sporty looking car and it will have a market share. The interior has some sport appointments to compliment the exterior. The MPG rating is a disappointment just like the 2010 Insight.

My 16 year old daughter drives one as well as a co-worker.

They both average near 50 mpg per tank. My daughters has around 8,000 miles on it and every tank has been near 50 mpg calculated. The winter tanks are dropping naturally.

I fully agree with msantos.

I have 2 gens of Prius and 2 gens of Honda Insights and I like all of them for different reasons and they all have weak points as well.

In the end, the real victory is in getting someone to drive a more efficient vehicle than they currently are.

 

GS 450h is a sporty hybrid CR-Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

 

someone posted weight of CR-Z few pages back.. it is not that heavy... keep in mind it has 2 seats only... It would would probably be 150-200lbs lighter than Fit Sport, without powertrain included.

0-62 in 9.7 seconds is from Japanese brochures that leaked i believe.

As to the something based on HSD - i did not talk about some mythical all super Prius Coupe... simply use 1.8l Valvematic engine (147hp) with HSD, instead of atkinson cycle engine, in smaller 2 seater coupe... it would shave a lot of weight off coupe, and give us 170hp vehicle.

But even then, problem is that you are left with 2800lbs coupe with 170hp, price that would probably be around 22k-25k, and 40 mpg.

On the other hand, you have FT-86, which they spent money on RWD chasis, low weight, 200hp engine... It would outhandle Prius Coupe, out brake it, be a LOT faster than it(20% more power, 10% less weight), and still get >30 mpg for the price that is the same. Plus it has "4 seats".

Honda can not find enough buyers for Insight... Insight, for what it is and compared to its class, is million times better vehicle than this CR-Z. If Insight cant cut it because it gets 40's mpg, i cant see how CR-Z with 30's mpg, slow acceleration, 2 seats and hight price can.

 

But with the powertrain, the Fit "Sport" is lighter per 2010 Honda Fit - Specifications - Official Honda Web site vs. Honda CR-Z Specifications - Official Honda Web Site.

 

The CR-Z is approx 2800lbs - the 1988 CRX Si was about 2000 lbs.

 

2800 lbs was the concept weight. The cr-z lost a little horse power and weight from concept to pre-production

From Honda
Weight (lbs., preliminary estimates): Approximately 2,670 (MT) to 2,725 (CVT)

Fit sport is 2520(MT) 2604 (AT)

I don't think the cr-x would be much lighter than the fit today if it had to add all the safety and pollution control devices demanded today. The seats are light and not much sheet metal is saved in the body style. Maybe 100lbs. You could save more weight if you put on 13" wheels and skimped on the suspension and sound insulation, but who would buy it over the fit? The yaris is lighter, but then again its a yaris.

.

I agree with everything here. It was me speculating what could be done.

I would like the ft-86 to do well. I'll believe fun to drive and 30mpg from toyota when i see it.

 

Honda likes to be first to the market. Toyota wants to be the best in the market.

I can't wait to how the car Toyota is working on to compete.

 

The link takes me to Jalopnik.... not Autoblog.

 

honda is hopeless to me. with all those ugly cars (crosstour, ZDX), failure of the insight, and now this pointless car. this looked like a perfect car to me, until the production model unveiling and the announcement of the scion iQ hybrid. honda, if u wanna build a sporty car, concentrate on the civic Si and bring back the S2000. if you wanna build a true hybrid, ditch the IMA and work on something else.

 

The EPA testing will not allow the eco button to be engaged. On the Honda system, this seems to be more detrimental to mpg than on the 2010 Prius.

As I posted earlier, my 16 yr old daughter drives this car and has never had a calculated tank mileage below the epa highway.

This pic is of the mileage one night with the eco button engaged on the 2010 Insight with me driving and less than 500 miles on the car.

 

I have been saying for some time now. If Honda keeps this up, they will be behind GM in hybrid technology. As far as I see it, they are currently behind Toyota (#1) and Ford (#2) in hybrid technology.

If IMA was a $2000 option it would be fine (an $18000 Insight), but its premium is far more and it does not deliver enough for that premium.

 

Per The Truth About EPA City / Highway MPG Estimates - Feature - Car and Driver, the eco button has no effect on the EPA tests.