garbage

 

eh. put some decent tires on it and get some shocks and springs. done

 

Well its not a sports car. Its basically the new HF, so why do you care, and why are you mad?

 

bring back the double wishbone suspension!

 

exactley!! Honda's mcphearson application is ****!

 

Its probably just the tires. A hybrid comes with rock solid low rolling resistant tires with the sole purpose of getting good milage. I bet if you put civic si tires on it, it would be way better.

 

I bet the ppl at Honda don't like this at all, as it makes it sound pretty dangerous to drive, and I bet that they make some changes.

 

the ****? If it was the HF, it'd still have nimble handling, it wouldn't weigh 2600lbs, it wouldn't cost $22K, and it would be getting FAR BETTER fuel economy! This car is a joke every which way and it's really a testament to how underwhelming Honda's product line has been in the last decade.

 

Tell me how you really feel.

You see since the HF there has been this wonderful thing called "safety" A rolling rattletrap car is far from the safety standards that are used today. You cannot just add safety features (read, ABS, airbags, crush zones, etc) without adding weight.

You also seem to have ignored the point someone made above where it was most likely due to the stiffer tires on the car, I'd personally be interested to see where a Prius and Insight score in comparison. They both might be tied at .79 and right behind the CRZ.

I will agree the fuel economy for a hybrid like the CRZ is poor, when a Fit can practically outdo it with more space.

 

Yes you can, See Honda Insight from 2000-2006... None of those things would account for the weight increase from 1800lbs to 2600lbs. Crush zones have been in cars since the 70s and that's the only thing that would *Potentially* add weight to the car substantially. All those things you listed would only drive up the price of the car, not add substantially to the weight. But even then, if you compare this car to the Ford Fiesta, the Fiesta wins across the board when you consider it isn't even a hybrid and because of that is significantly less money unless you start tacking on the amenities.
I think YOU'RE missing the point that this car is a piece of **** excuse for a sporty hybrid. It's crap in every segment and appeals to noone except a damned fool. Why would I buy this car if a Prius gets better mileage, can be had for the same money, much larger, has similar performance (wtf?), etc???

 

WTF?!

 

1960 lbs to 2725 lbs (curb weight CVT models)

The Insight has a 1.0L 3cyl engine vs the CRZ's 1.5L 4cyl. You also have the earlier generation of the IMA system which is NOT identical to the new system so weights are going to differ. Without knowing 100% I do know most other Hondas went from the double-wishbone to the MacPherson strut system which has added weight as well. Knowing that is applicable to Civics, I'm going to wager the Insight (1st gen) used double-wishbone and the CRZ uses the MacPherson. My point of stating those items was they have been improved since they were introduced, if you are saying they are identical to what they were in the 70's you are kidding yourself.

I'm also going to say in crash tests I have an inkling the CRZ will outperform the Insight.

And I never said it was an awesome car, but it is apparent they are not targeting you as their audience. I wouldn't buy one either for similar reasons. I think it is too expensive and I would rather have a Fit or Fiesta as well. But when you argument is "**** this car and **** Honda" you really do not come off as a reasonable source.

 

Unfortunately, I agree that the CR-Z is a poorly executed car. Good mileage? Not really. Good handling? Not really. Somewhat quick? Not really. When you have a car that can't do ONE thing well, it pretty much sucks. Honda needs to pull their head out of their rear and make this car something to brag about by someone. Gas mileage people giggle at it for getting regular gas mileage (or worse) while being a hybrid. Handling people laugh, well, because it's on a list of the top ten worst handling cars. Performance people laugh because they suck at acceleration. They did decent on the looks but I think the car is still a bit chunky, both in looks and weight.

Put a K with a 6 speed in it and call it an Si, put a REAL hybrid drivetrain in it that gets REAL hybrid mileage and call it an H something (HX, HF, etc). Or just call the turd they currently sell the Base or Standard since it pretty much sucks....

 

None of those things add weight to the car, it's all in the design. Your association with weight and improvements is a misnomer since improvements don't always have a cost to them. If anything, cars have gotten lighter for a given performance metric. Compare with any of the civics from the 70s to 80s with the late 90s civics and you'll see the late 90s civics weigh maybe 200lbs more yet are significantly safer, larger, roomier, better performance, etc. etc. As for the IMA system in the CRZ, what is so amazing is that instead of using the IMA system from the Honda Civic Hybrid 2006+, they're using one that more closely resembles the original IMA system of 2000-2006. (13HP IMA on CRZ just like first gen Civic hybrid and first gen Insight vs 20hp IMA on the 2006+ Civic Hybrid). The idea that you can have a two seater that weights 2(6/7)00lbs yet has such poor peformance when a Fiesta weighs around 2400-2500lbs and comes with 5 doors and seats 5 people, has better performance across the board, is cheaper, has a slight MPG penalty, you have to think about how ridiculous this all sounds.
Well since crash tests are always against a vehicle of its own weight, getting 5 stars whether you weigh 1600lbs or 5000lbs shouldn't be any more or less difficult. Now if you want to compare a 2(6/7)00lbs CRZ with the 1800lb Insight, going head to head, well that's not a fair comparison now is it? Want another example of a lack luster vehicle? The SmartForTwo.. Gets horrible MPG for the smallish vehicle it is and while it's structure is designed to be very safe, it's still a POS. This decade is the worst when it came to affordable cars. Just all a bunch of underwhelming crap!!!


Oh I'm sorry, was I suppose to give my unbiased opinion? I can state all of the facts about the CR-Z and compare it to other vehicles but just let everyone else come to the same conclusion, but I choose to state the facts and then rant about how crappy of a vehicle it truly is. Why can't I rant about this vehicle when all the points I bring up are factual and valid? It's frustrating to see how Honda has fallen so hard and are only surviving because of their inherent brand image. Everything they make today is so lack luster that it's disappointing to see that things don't appear to be changing any time soon and they're ok with that.

 

Considering the paltry mileage it gets as a Hybrid, I wonder the kind of mileage it would get if they just put the Honda Civic drivetrain in there and called it a day?

 

I bet it would probably do better all around. Sad if that is really true...

 

wait, isn't it marketed as the worlds first "Sports Hybrid"? oh yeah.. therefore it IS a "sports car"...

at least the fit isn't on that list.. although, there are a lot of hondas...

 

wow, thats pretty bad. but at least it gets good gas mileage

 

Uhh, no. It doesn't. 35/39 for CVT and 31/37 for 6 speed. In comparison, a 2011 Civic hybrid is rated at 40/43 (still not great), the Insight is rated at 40/43. Pretty sure the Civic and Insight are both heavier but still get quite a bit better gas mileage.

 

my wife's 08 fit sport manual can get 31/37.. AND seats 5.. AND isn't on this list.. but it is no "sports hybrid". hahahaa.

 

In what world does the skidpan lateral G from grip relate to the actual handling of a car?

Also im not sure double wishbone is actually lighter than McPherson. I know lighter than double is what Ford champion with their RevoKnuckle.


Im amazed that so far in the Insight discussion it hasn't yet been mentioned that the Insight is an tiny bodied aluminium monocoque, hence its so light and the engine is a frankley comical 124lbs, with little ally wheels and uber light and low rolling resistance tyres (Re92 - 13lbs), it even has ally drums.

You can not really use it as a benchmark for anything Honda can make that will actually make them money.

 

If they just make a non hybrid version of the first generation insight and put a more stout engine in it, it may very well make up for the costs of having an aluminum shell. I'd rather have a non hybrid that is light weight than a hybrid that is heavy.

 

This makes no sense? What are the rules for this test? Why is a 2 door hatchback being compared to minivans? So a Hummer handles better? This is ridiculous.

 

the late 80's early 90's were putting down 50+mpg..

all this High MPG stuff these days is a joke.