That argument holds no water. The EPA rates your dad's RSX at 20/28. He gets much better than rated. Imagine what he'd get in a CRZ.
USDM front end collision/pedestrian collision requirements. Besides, maybe that means there's more room for a future K20.
2670 per Honda. Comparing Fit Sport weight to base Fit weights I'd imagine ~2700 lbs loaded (NOT the CVT version). Yeah heavy, but Internet exaggeration for the lose.

 

this post ftw.

i'm looking at the pics....you know we all got up in arms over the fits overhang, and this is no different. get over it. you think its ugly? great! you dont have to drive the car. can you really call any honda beautiful? ceratinly not the original crx.


i could get into every aspect why this car is NOT a fail, but one thing i would LOVE to inquire about is why everyone is writing it off...without even having DRIVEN the damn thing? i know we are all smart and educated on the internet, but seriously whats with all the judgement?

any real crx fan would also do well to respect the fact that the perfection that was the original crx was its balance...not your ability to stuff a big ass engine into it and make it go fast in a straight line. as fit owners we should appreciate more than most the concept of a lightweight car thats fun to drive but not very fleet.

to top it off, all this 'sucks mileage wise for a hybrid' nonsense is excactly that....NONSENSE.

the fit does not get mileage that is 'close' the the ratings of the cr-z. (remember the final mileage ratings are still up in the air) it gets better mileage than the civic, (city highway and combined) and almost gets as good as the insight. if you or whoever gets great mileage out of there car thats rated worse, IMAGINE what you could do with the cr-z. it will be faster than the fit currently is, and probably on par with a m/t civic with the exception of the si.

is this car for everyone? no. i would be a great candidate (appreciates handling, needs a hatch, married with no kids, great mileage, low cost to own) but i realize thats far and in between, so honda should not expcect to sell that many.

but this car is hardly deserving of the hate its recieving, again, especially because none of YOU or the automotive press has driven it.

 

In response to the above posts, I will first quote another site.

The whole question of what the CR-Z is trying to be, a sporty hybrid with mediocre fuel economy, or a hybrid sports car with mediocre performance is unfortunately as confused as its marriage of a sedan front end with a sports car middle. The result is a hybrid of a different sort; a mish-mash of styles and performance goals that reminds me painfully of another car with a similar problem: the Gremlin or the AMC Spirit/Eagle Coupe. Trying to serve too many masters, or being too cheap to do it right is not a recipe for success.

I think a lot of people are disappointed because they expected a new CRX. What they got was a car with a complex drivetrain, questionable styling compared to the concept car and a weight, let me correct myself, of 2720 lbs from thetruthaboutcars.com. Which, is only 24 lbs less than a Insight that is longer and has 4 doors.

The fuel economy is probably too low for a hybrid buyer and the hp #'s don't scream out performance to those looking for a sporty car. Who is the target audience?

It could be incredibly fun to drive. However, I don't think it is going to sell very well or end up being modified like other Hondas because of the drivetrain complexities, brake complexities, etc.

I was expecting more. That is why I am disappointed.

 

Honda needs to actually put up a hybrid with STRONG MPG NUMBERS if they want a place in the smug part of the market. I might like their cars but the numbers need to talk too, and it hurts me to think the CR-Z may sell as poorly as the Insight 2nd gen.

 

what were you expecting then?

i guess it depends on what your idea of 'the next crx' should be....if thats what you were expecting, you should have bought a 1st gen insight.

what does the crx have the cr-z does not?
fuel efficiency? the crz has that. maybe not to the same regard, but still fuel efficient.

style? it has that too, maybe not to YOUR taste, but its there. the original cr-x was not exactly a beauty queen in its day either.

lightweight? uh...have you SEEN how much small hatchbacks weigh nowadays? honda cant play by the rules set in 1987....for 2010, the cr-z still holds true to the honda playbook of 'lighter than everyone else'.

fun to drive? well...the fit is fun to drive, the insight is reasonably 'fun to drive' for a hybrid (oversteer lol)....and the european civic type r/civic is based off this same platform....so unless the insight just fails in this regard, i think honda hit all their targets.


OH! one thing, and this may not matter to many of the folks on this site who would just as soon take the airbags out of their car to save weight, but you will actually survive in a car accident with this thing, as opposed to being crushed beyond recognition in an original cr-x....just you know, some food for thought.

 

I Like it but See my screen name. There always room for improvement. My insight was not as powerfull as my fit but, I swear it was quicker. And funner to drive to, the tires just sucked. But You Have to Take a economy car for wut it is. Im just glad they may be selling it. May be my next car if its less that 20k. With My personal experience,.. Moar Power= Moar tickets+Moar Cops+ Moar Insurance= Moar trouble. I think it would make a cool little car to putt around in for daily uses. Plus Its moar fun to drive a slow car fast than It is to drive a fast car slow.

 

Personally, I love the car. If I were buying now the CR-Z would be my choice. Sure the overall HP is low, but like my decision when it came to the Fit, if the car is fun to drive I don't really care how fast it goes.

 

Looked like a AMC Gremlin from the side...


I'm more excited about the 6-spd trans for our engine.

 

I would get one. I like it.

 

Best looking hybrid yet, imo. Better looking than the Fit, imo. It will yield better mpg results than the Fit. How does it drive? How much will it cost? Second generation changes will probably find better market footing.

I like it too.

 

That I can understand. I haven't seen a JDM unit released yet - maybe that one might look better.

The USDM schnoz is rather ungainly though - more so than the GE's because of the comparatively bluff grille. Wouldn't bet on the longer overhang liberating more engine bay room either, if the GE is any indication.

 

One thing I have been thinking about: why 5 lug wheels? It barely produces any more power or torque than the Fit... nearly the same as the 5th, 6th, and 7th generation Civics... hell it has less power than early 90s Accords. Why would it need 5 lugs?

As a matter of fact, the civic did not get 5 lugs until generation 8 and the release of the 200hp K20 powered Si, yet even the R18 civics have 5 lug wheels. Food for thought...

 

Me too, the looks don't really appeal to me but maybe it will grow on me.

 

5-Lug is starting to become the "norm" nowadays.

 

Well first in regards to mileage. Just like the insight. EPA test a vehicle in "worst mode possible" So in the case of the CR-Z that would be sport mode. Not ECO or Regular. Second at least in my region the Crosstour sells very well and Honda sold 2600 in a little over the first month. The CR-Z is a 15k a year vehicle so that works out to 1-1.5 per month per dealer. If gas goes to 4.00 again people will buy them.

I would still rather have my Fit but for a commuter car it might be fun.

 

If that were true then Fits would have 5 lug. Same with Insight. But neither of them do, and the CRZ is smaller than both. I'd be willing to bet $100 there will be a K20 version.

 

why is 4 lugs or 5 lugs indicative of how much power/what type of engine a car has? 02-03 si's came with k20's and they were 4 lug.

i dont see the connection.

 

How is it not indicative? Small cars have 4 lugs. Bigger cars have 5 lugs. Big trucks have 6 lugs. Really big trucks have 8 lugs, and enormous trucks have 10 lugs or more.
As mass and torque increase, so does the need for the drivetrain to be able to handle the increased load.

Regardless, I've since changed my opinion on the matter because of the recent CR-Z marketing Honda has used on the official CR-Z website. Looks like it'll be hybrid all the way!

 

i just never reasoned as such. i'll use the ep3 si as an indicating factor, not that much more hp or tq than a regular ex of the time, and no more power when they made the change from 4 to five lugs in 2004. (or mass for that matter)

 

I think the MPG figures are conservative. Who knows what mode he car was in when those figures were taken. The other thing people seem to forget is that the EPA measurements for mileage are also measured differently now than even 2 years ago.

I also expect the sport mode to offer a lot of electric motor assist which might surprise us. The electric motor offers an instant torque boost even when the engine is in the low RPMs. I think this could "spark" a lot of interest with the next generation tuner community.

All in all I think people are jumping ship a little early. I plan to consider trading in the Fit once my dealership has them.

The engine, to my knowledge, is the same as whats in our Fits. I saw one shot with the hood open, and it looks like my PRM intake might work right off the bat.

The pricing, from what I've heard, is very reasonable. I've heard 18k starting out, and like 21-22k for the ex with navi.