LexFather

Well after driving the CT I decided that I would drive the other new sporty hybrid, the Honda CR-Zzzzzz Now understand I know one is 23k and the other 10 grand more so I don't expect the CR-Z to match the CT. I did really want to compare the sport aspect between the two.

My distaste for it on paper has been posted here so you know I wasn't expecting to like it much. So you know when I say I now like it, you know its not that bad. Maybe I really am turning into a hybrid hippie

The CR-Z has been pawned off to us by Honda as a successor to the CRX and as the "sporty" hybrid. To their credit it does offer the only manual with a hybrid powertrain. So how was it? Not bad!

Exterior

I'm sorry but its hard not to either laugh or barf looking at the Honda lot. Outside the Accord coupe nothing looks good to me. I kept looking around hoping to like something but ended up being assaulted by a new Odyessy. That horrible window line and exposed door track are horrific. It looks like 3 different vehicles. So that helped the CR-Z when I got to it. Its not too bad, I've seen one before and the aggressive air damn is well aggressive for a car with 122hp. The HID bulb has some blue tint to it. The crease works well in the side and from the front quarter angle they have a nice visual trickery where you can't really see the rear and the rear deck slopes up. Nice. The rear is bulbous with the black deck. Overall its not bad in person and does look sporty with some CR-X DNA until you see it from the side and then you are confronted with a giant front overhang. From the front/rear quarters it looks pretty good. Surely a drop and larger wheels would fill things out. I'm sure modded tastefully it would really tidy things up.

Interior

The interior is very different to anything else not Honda. So that is a good and a bad thing. This is a 23k car so I didn't expect great plastics but these were very hard and there was a mix of them around. The doors had a weird cloth pattern. The seats were VERY comfy cloth seats though, grippy and fit well. Everything is within reach, the climate control is easy to use with the right hand and has a nice simple readout. The gauges glow a really bright blue, kinda artificial and lacking the Lexus preciseness but different and it glows green too depending on mode. It is easy to read. The left side has the 3 buttons for the different modes. It might look weird but ergonomics are FANTASTIC.

The center cubby is HUGE, its odd b/c it looks like something should go there. You can put tons of stuff there and the USB/Aux port is there. The NAV/radio looks like an aftermarket stereo but it didn't bug me much. Again this is a 23k car. The NAV seemed easy to use and it was nice and bright.

Going to the cargo area, the rear shelf was folded so behind the seats looked like pretty ample room for more than enough things. The folded shelf folds up so you can sit groceries. The salesman also showed me how the rear hatch cover moves to either cover the entire hatch or just part of it, which I thought was a neat move. The rear opening is fantastic to drop as much in there as possible.

The Drive

Seriously is there anything like a Honda manual? This thing was cold, with 22 miles and it shifts like butter. Amazing. The manual is IMO the best part of the car here. I LOVED shifting it, it was so fluid. The metal pedals are small and kinda slippery but I had shoes on, not sneakers. Well the thing is you HAVE to shift the car. This has LESS power than the CT and it feels like it. You have to keep it in sport so the throttle will engage, otherwise in eco/norm this car is a complete slug. Shame cause the manual is so good. I got the car up to 65 on local roads and drove 3 miles. The salesman didn't object when I pushed it and while there was no tire squeal the front did feel more ponderous than the CT which was surprising. You feel in corners compared to the CT it feels more ponderous. Maybe bigger tires and sways would help it. Its not bad but again doesn't match the manual.

The engine needs all the revving it can get. Even with IMA it doesn't feel swift and it is LOUD when you hit the gas and rev it. Too loud for me, almost to the point of being unrefined. I guess they WANT it to be loud so it sounds fast but it doesn't sound sexy at all. Cruising around, things were fine but you BETTER be in the right gear if you plan to pass anyone.

Brakes were solid (they are very small and thin looking at them) and had a good feel for a hybrid. Felt as good as the CT to me.

Front visibility was good as were the sides but like the CT the rear needs help. The rear window is a joke, its mostly surrounded by plastic.

Other tidbits

You push in the gas lid to open it.
31 city, 37 highway is significantly less than the more luxurious, heavier, more powerful CT
Another cubby above the NAV area
Floormats standard (not on the Insight though)
nice handbrake and stitching for the manual

Summary

You know like the CT I can't help but think how this would drive with 200hp. Unlike the CT it would need more help in the chassis as it felt front heavy with only 122hp. The manual IS FANTASTIC and just SUPERB. If all manuals were like this I think more people would drive manuals (though its easy to shift like this with hardly any torque). Overall I liked it, it looks better in person, the ergonomics are great, there was good space in the rear hatch and the manual is great.

That said I didn't come away feeling it was the "sporty" hybrid though. The CR-Z looks sporty, it has a manual, it tries to sound sporty but never felt like a sporty car. I felt the CT was sportier which is really quite a feat for Lexus. As a daily commuter and a price under 25k easily, for a single person, it would work well for them

Mike

mmarshall

Thanks, Mike. Good review. I reviewed the CVT version a while ago, so I'm glad you got your hands on a 6MT to compare. Honda does what is arguably the best manual FWD shift-lingage on the planet...as you can see (that's one of the many reasons why Civics became so popular). With the 6MT, you probably didn't have to put up with the motorboating/rubber-band action of the CVT, but did you notice any surging or bumping in the IMA system between the gas and electric motors? The IMA system, in my experience, has never been known for smoothness or refinement. Personally, I think they should have done this car with two different engines (conventional and hybrid) instead of just an IMA version.

Also, with the regenerative-braking function, you actually have some BRAKES on this car. The rotors/calipers on the previous CRX were a joke.

GSteg

iTrader: (15)

I kept on having to check back to make sure it was 1SICKLEX who wrote the article. Could have sworn I was reading Car and Driver with all that Honda loving


As a suggestion, perhaps in your future reviews you can rate the card out of 10?

LexFather

Thanks Mike. I can't really recall IMA feeling like it was surging or bumping. The car simply has no power, IMA or no IMA and it really takes everything it has to get out of its own way. Slowest car I've driven in a long time (not including the CT which felt quicker).

Hahaaha my Accord review was pretty complimentary too. Of course fanbois don't read these threads or posts but heaven forbid I say "the beak is ugly" a red button goes off in their mommas basement and all hell breaks loose.

Its not a bad car to me but not great either. I can understand why one would buy it. Sporty looks, Honda reliability and good MPG.

dsp979

I finally saw one Friday morning parked at a trail head. Did a walk around and peeked inside, was not impressed.

ecr527

Nice review. Any pics of the interior?

SLegacy99

Truly would have made more sense for this car to have the 1.8L from the Civic.

baddis es

iTrader: (3)

i'm waiting for someone to swap a K-series in this thing...love the looks, and makes me miss my CRX Si that much more!

good review!!!

jwong77

Hey 1SickLex good review,

Was it stickered at 23k for the model with Nav (was there any dealer markup or anything else on it)? What material were the seats?

LexFather

Thanks. No, I didn't take any.

Thanks. Like the CT an optional engine with more power would be great.

Yes 23k, no markup. Guy said they have sold 7 so far, 5 were automatics. The seats were cloth.

Hopefully more power will become an option.

Lil4X

At $23K (loaded) for all that technology, the CR-Z looks like a bargain, despite the fact it doesn't live up to the promised style of the prototype. Of course the production model in steel is never as sharply drawn as the initial sketches. "Sporty hybrid" has to retire the oxymoron trophy, and I really wonder why you pay a premium over a Civic for such a considerable loss of performance. But then again, the Civic is the class-leader in bargain transportation, so maybe Honda set the bar so high it trips up even their own pretenders.

When a "sporty" car can't outperform the lowly Civic, you have to wonder about its real market niche. Maybe for greenies who have tired of their Prius and want to revisit the sleek appearance and row-it-yourself transmission experience of a sporty car it's a winner. If they'd drop the 1.8 from the Civic EX into this package, they might actually have a REAL sporty car that can produce some actual driving entertainment without much of a loss in mpgs.

I do sorta like the style, even if it harks back to the two-box running-shoe style of the original Rabbit. A few hours in the oven to melt the sharp corners off, and voilà, you have a CR-Z. Rearward visibility looks like a problem with that nearly level rear glass with that narrow vertical pane may give some visibility directly behind you, but the quarters appear to be blind. No help are the window-on-the-outside, porthole-on-the-inside quarter windows that look like they were the functional relatives of that on the 2gen RX3-series Lexus. Normally, rearward vision isn't much of a problem, but with this car, apparently you can expect a LOT of traffic to be gaining on you . . . it would be helpful to see some of it, even if you can't actually do anything about it.

All those negatives aside, let's look at the positives. The CR-Z is an economy car of the first order, but not the hair-shirt variety available from most of the market where you must actually suffer for your environmental responsibility. As a commuter car, it is practically perfect, offering a lot of techno-toys to keep the cube-rat entertained during the daily slog. OK, it's not for the hot-shoe, but at 40 mph following that bumper in front of you, who needs 300 hp? The instrument panel seems a bit excessive, but if you're an inveterate gamer, it's probably fine. All it needs is a HUD and radar brakes, and you can imagine your own Nintendo controls. If it continues Honda's reputation for reliability and long life (when driven with a modicum of maturity), the CR-Z should be a class-leading commuter car.

If only they'd dropped that 1.8 into it.

bagwell

nice review...

I agree the car looks much better in person...much better the some of the lame pics I've seen.

IMO it looks horrible in red


Hyundai should clone/copy this version of the CR-Z.....

LexFather

THanks everyone. Let me also add something I forgot to say in the review. The salesman was solid. He didn't give me any crap for wanting to drive the car, he was very knowledgable of the product and also didn't pressure me at all. A day later I got a "thank you" card in the mail which was impressive since I've tested tons of cars and don't recall getting one before. Great sales job!