Here is an article I found on autoblog.com that just destroys the CR-Z reputation with ignorance. So do some of the user comments below where they compare the car to the Focus and the old Pontiac Aztec. Kinda made me mad because they are missing the whole point of this car. Plus haven't they seen the Spoon and Mugen models? Plus there is also a new Japanese "Battle of Vtec" that shows the Spoon CR-Z smash an all stock Euro Civic Type R.

http://www.autoblog.com/2010/06/18/f...11-honda-cr-z/

Anyway, just thought I would share. I am no means a hybrid lover, but I love everything about the CR-Z and I think that Honda is going in the right direction with it. I also hope they introduce an SI model later on.

 

I didn't read the article, but the Spoon version is so expensive that it better smash a stock Civic Type R without any problem. To me the CR-Z seems like the answer to a question that nobody asked.

 

LOL, very true. But I love the car. I think in the end, the CR-Z would have been great with just the stock fit motor. It would still get similar MPG, but would have way more followers.

 

I skimmed through the article, but didn't find anything untrue. The car should be the new CRX that the DelSol never was, but it deserves a better engine. Who would spend $24,000 then immediately do an engine swap, unless they had money to burn?

 

The thing that makes me laugh is ive talked to honda hybrid owners (i work for a honda dealer) and they said they have owned both accord I-4 and v6 and also the hybrid, they mention all the time.....there was pretty much no difference in the gas mileage, same from civic hybrid to normal gas owners. I do agree with you on the normal fit motor slammed, though i think they should have made an SI model and did a K20, it makes me laugh when i keep reading that honda wants to appeal this car to the older people and us tuner people.

 

crz is gay

 

only nice hondas sold in america are acuras lol

 

I read on another site that Honda has no plans releasing a specialty model like the SI or the Type R. This came from some higher up, but he said it's not totally axed.

Yes, the article was just speaking the truth, but when someone love a brand they would be more willing to accept the product. But it feel like the editor of that article came in with a negative perspective. I personally hate the Insight, but the CR-Z makes more sense to me.

 

with that wimpy engine it is.... I want to see an Si/R model w/ a K20!

 

yea which sucks, but owell this whole go green crap is starting to tick me off.

 

Journalists shouldn't be "loving a brand."

The CR-Z makes 0 sense to me. It isn't a completely ridiculous engineering experiment like the original Insight. It isn't a practical car due to only seating 2. It isn't sporty enough (solid beam rear axle? GTFO) to justify owning as a second car like a roadster.

If someone can justify the purchase of a CR-Z over a Civic Si or Fit, I would love to hear it. The car has far too many compromises with no reward for me.

 

I call bullshit on Honda trying to make anything that appeals to tuners. I really think that they're busting their buns to get away from that image. They're trying to look eco-friendly because that's trendy.
Look at the EP3 Si. Sporty, but DEFINITELY not a sports car. They specifically designed the suspension to resist lowering, or to handle like turd when it is lowered. They put the weakest K-series in it. Limited the wheel well space so that rolling is required for anything more than 20-30 over the stock 195 wide tires. (I own an EP3, so that's why I use it as an example).
They are specifically designing cars that either straight up do not appeal to us, or appeal to us, but screw us over on the modding.

 

WTF are you talking about?

1) The EP3/RSX/7th gen Civic/Element/CRV suspension was designed as it was to allow better crash standards. With double-wishbone, you just don't have enough room up front for the crumple zones that Honda wanted

2) The Ep3 got the 160hp K-series because Acura already had a 200hp K-series in the same basic chassis (RSX). Why would Honda want to compete with themselves?

And the EP3/RSX handles just fine when you lower it moderately. When the ricers slam it, they get what they deserve--crappy handling (name me any strut-car that doesn't suffer when slammed).

FWIW, Honda really never designed their cars with modifications in mind. It just so happened that some models highly benefited from certain mods.

 

If by right direction you mean letting Hyundai, Ford, etc. pass them by, then yes.

Honda needs to pull their heads out of their @sses and realize that they can no longer steer the market as there are too many good car manufactures right now. And those other companies make cars that folks want to own. A 122hp 2700 lb 2-seat FWD hybrid car with a beam rear axle isn't too high on the list of many.

Sure, folks will buy them. But I don't think they'll sell as good as Honda thinks they will.

 

Yes and no. It can be done but it can't be done cheap.
I disagree with that. Honda built a lot of their cars with lower end racing in mind and they were not shy about admitting it.

Semi related image, a dealer poster from the early 90's:

 

And Honda isn't going to spend the money it takes to do so when it prices the Civic above its competition. Plus, no one else's offering has wishbone and to 99.5% of the people out there, they really don't care anyways.

Still, I'll argue that in order to get a 5-star crash rating in 2010 (which will sell more cars than wishbone suspension) in a compact car, it is pretty difficult to do so anyways.

They used racing as a marketing tool. A lot of car manufactures did/do the same thing, only I don't see it as much as I once did. I don't think Honda ever designed a Civic to be a race chassis first, commuter car second (besides the NSX and S2000, but obviously those were never intended to get groceries).

Honda was always about motorsports and elements of their cars reflected this. But my response was to the person that thought Honda took out "racing" from all of their cars, but I don't find to be completely true because they never truly had those intentions in the first place.

Truth be told none of us know what gets planned in Japan. However, I do agree that Honda has somewhat lost their way, as evidenced by the CR-Z. I'm still not sure who they are trying to attract with that car.

 

x753625457

 

1) That makes more sense to me now. And by moderate lowering, you must mean an inch or less, BTW. I'm not backing up extreme slamming, but the chassis really resists lowering.
2) The K20A3 barely gains anything from intake and exhaust mods. and doesn't handle much power increases, as far as I know.
3) Exactly what I was getting at! The OP seems to think that the CR-Z is supposed to be a tuneable car. But I'm really thinking that they're trying to get away from the tuner, or more specifically the ricer image. I think that The Fast and The Furious and such really shamed the Honda image. I know guys at work who are against Honda specifically because they're riced out too much.
Also, I'm pretty sure that double wishbone suspension handles better than strut; I don't know that for sure, so correct me if I'm incorrect. (I think F1 cars are double wishbone.)

 

I've waited for the day these babies pop out for a long time, and to find it had no k20 package made me sick . Hasport hopefully will make swap mounts, otherwise I'm sticking with the 2 OG crxs i've grown up loving.

 

honda needs a sti,m3,boxer,cobra,evo,gtr,corvette,gtr,lfa..killa not a slow hybrid...thats what we got the honda insight for hybrid..

 

That is a well thought out and written article. There is nothing 'hater' about it.

You sir, are just some delusional fanboy.

 

Well i wont really hate on the CR-z but i have had four CRX's in the past and was looking forward to the new one but when this came out it was a dissapointment... nice that they came out with a new setup but hybrid is not really the way to go for performance....

 

Apparently you haven't been following what other automakers are releasing as their premium cars over the next 5 years. Hybrid's ARE the future of performance.

 

If you are a single women with no kids and working at a full time job that pays 20-30 grand a year....then the crz was designed for you....just like the crx was 20 something years ago. These buyers want to save the planet, they want something cute that says they are single and they can not aford someting that is overly quick. This car has nothing to do with guys.....unless you are light in the chuckie t's.

 

No they are not the future of performance. It will be years before the battery technology really becomes light enough to allow them to really be competitive against an internal combustion engine for any extended stretch of time.

The only reason Porsche and Ferrari, and other prominent sports car companies have built some of these high end hybrid sports cars is to show that they are capable of doing it, and to see if a "green" version of their cars will help them sell more product.