Production Honda CR-Zzzzzzz revealed (priced, 20k base, hits dealers in Aug)
09-14-10, 08:03 AM
#196
Guest
Posts: n/a
Production.
Pic of not modded Fit
Honda has a serious design issue with these awful giant overhangs and short wheelbases. The TL is one of the worst
10-11-10, 07:24 PM
#198
Lexus Fanatic
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: A better place
Posts: 7,285
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've seen it in person, and I can't say it looks good at all. I can't get over that rear end styling, I though it was an Insight when I saw it from a distance 
. Definitely not something I bet Honda wants the CR-Z to be mistaken for.
It looks decent, but not that great. Huge front overhang makes the car look disproportionate in real life just as in pictures.
. Definitely not something I bet Honda wants the CR-Z to be mistaken for. It looks decent, but not that great. Huge front overhang makes the car look disproportionate in real life just as in pictures.
10-11-10, 07:42 PM
#201
Lexus Fanatic
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: A better place
Posts: 7,285
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Matter of opinion I guess. The Insight looks even worse to me; the Insight looks terribly awkward to me in person.
10-12-10, 09:46 AM
#205
Lexus Fanatic
Yes, in my recent CR-Z review, I listed the lack of a conventional gas-powertrain (and espcially an Si version) as one of the present design's chief faults. The IMA/CVT drivetrain leaves a lot to be desired in smoothness, low-speed power, and refinement. But, to its credit, it is the first U.S.-market hybrid that offers a true three-pedal 6-speed manual transmission, which is not only a sporty touch, but also, of course, does away with the CVT's annoying rubber-banding and motorboating characteristics.
10-12-10, 11:18 AM
#206
Yes, in my recent CR-Z review, I listed the lack of a conventional gas-powertrain (and espcially an Si version) as one of the present design's chief faults. The IMA/CVT drivetrain leaves a lot to be desired in smoothness, low-speed power, and refinement. But, to its credit, it is the first U.S.-market hybrid that offers a true three-pedal 6-speed manual transmission, which is not only a sporty touch, but also, of course, does away with the CVT's annoying rubber-banding and motorboating characteristics.
Put in the engine from Fit and clearly CR-Z will be better vehicle than with their IMA system.
10-12-10, 05:13 PM
#207
Lexus Fanatic
the fact that it offers inferior technology does not give it any credit... there is no point if creating small, light, low hp hybrid and then getting beaten by Fit with standard engine, is there?
Put in the engine from Fit and clearly CR-Z will be better vehicle than with their IMA system.
Put in the engine from Fit and clearly CR-Z will be better vehicle than with their IMA system.
The Fit comes with a 5-speed manual; the CR-Z, a 6-speed manual.....the first hybrid in the American market to do so. So the CR-Z is already one gear ahead in that department. As for the engine, the Fit's conventional 1.5L VTEC in-line 4 has 106 ft-lbs. of torque.......the CR-Z, 128 ft-lbs. with the 6-speed and 123 with the CVT. One area where, I agree, the Fit DOES do a little better than the CR-Z is in powertrain smoothness/refinement. Honda, unlike Toyota, has not (yet) figured out a way to make its hybrid/CVT-combination to operate smoothly, without motorboating/rubber-banding......there, you may have a point.
10-13-10, 12:59 AM
#208
How does the CR-Z get "beat" by the Fit? The Fit comes with a 5-speed manual; the CR-Z, a 6-speed manual.....the first hybrid in the American market to do so. So the CR-Z is already one gear ahead in that department. As for the engine, the Fit's conventional 1.5L VTEC in-line 4 has 106 ft-lbs. of torque.......the CR-Z, 128 ft-lbs. with the 6-speed and 123 with the CVT.
One area where, I agree, the Fit DOES do a little better than the CR-Z is in powertrain smoothness/refinement. Honda, unlike Toyota, has not (yet) figured out a way to make its hybrid/CVT-combination to operate smoothly, without motorboating/rubber-banding......there, you may have a point.
The Fit comes with a 5-speed manual; the CR-Z, a 6-speed manual.....the first hybrid in the American market to do so. So the CR-Z is already one gear ahead in that department. As for the engine, the Fit's conventional 1.5L VTEC in-line 4 has 106 ft-lbs. of torque.......the CR-Z, 128 ft-lbs. with the 6-speed and 123 with the CVT. One area where, I agree, the Fit DOES do a little better than the CR-Z is in powertrain smoothness/refinement. Honda, unlike Toyota, has not (yet) figured out a way to make its hybrid/CVT-combination to operate smoothly, without motorboating/rubber-banding......there, you may have a point.
Finally, a full real test of the CRZ 6 speed manual (C&D)
Notes:
1. Their CRZ is slower than the Fit both 0-60 and 0-1/4SS (9.6 vs 8.6 and 17.2 vs 16.7)
2. Their CRZ had better top speed, 122 to 110 mph thanks to aero handicapped Fit.
Big Note: C&D charged their CRZ IMA battery to full before each run, (see test notes) so acceleration numbers are the best that could be expected. Wait'll CR runs those tests.
3. Perhaps due to better tires as well as lower cg, road holding on the CRZ bettered the Fit but then our Fit gets .88g on Direzzas.
4. Their CRZ got 36 mpg compared to Fit 33 mpg.
Notes:
1. Their CRZ is slower than the Fit both 0-60 and 0-1/4SS (9.6 vs 8.6 and 17.2 vs 16.7)
2. Their CRZ had better top speed, 122 to 110 mph thanks to aero handicapped Fit.
Big Note: C&D charged their CRZ IMA battery to full before each run, (see test notes) so acceleration numbers are the best that could be expected. Wait'll CR runs those tests.
3. Perhaps due to better tires as well as lower cg, road holding on the CRZ bettered the Fit but then our Fit gets .88g on Direzzas.
4. Their CRZ got 36 mpg compared to Fit 33 mpg.
10-13-10, 01:04 AM
#209
Fit is both faster and a lot cheaper, and seats more people has more space... we come to the conclusion that Fit's engine being fitted into lighter CR-Z chassis would also bring better performance and cheaper price, dont we? And probably have same mpg due to weight being lesser than Fits and 6 speed.
So how exactly wouldnt it be better choice to use Fit's engine?
- cheaper
- faster
- better mpg
So how exactly wouldnt it be better choice to use Fit's engine?
- cheaper
- faster
- better mpg
10-13-10, 09:04 AM
#210
Lexus Fanatic
Fit is both faster and a lot cheaper, and seats more people has more space... we come to the conclusion that Fit's engine being fitted into lighter CR-Z chassis would also bring better performance and cheaper price, dont we? And probably have same mpg due to weight being lesser than Fits and 6 speed.
So how exactly wouldnt it be better choice to use Fit's engine?
- cheaper
- faster
- better mpg
So how exactly wouldnt it be better choice to use Fit's engine?
- cheaper
- faster
- better mpg
Of course, it could (?) have been a matter of simple developement money. Honda may not have had enough extra cash on hand to use (and EPA-certify) three different CR-Z engines, like they did back in the 1980's with the original CRX. As it is, they had to certify the current IMA with two different transmissions.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
