Archives

FLOP! FLOP! FLOP!

Some of you know I was real high on this car. The idea of this car. This car I wanted to want. As development went forward it became clear it was to be a marketing dept. car. IE failure.

A few weeks ago CRZ was in Oklahoma. All of the cars seemed to be fully loaded CVT imposter's. Why should I waste time driving a CVT? I already have a HCHII.

Today a dealer calls me. They have a base 6MT. I make it clear,,, I am not buying. Just want to drive. They seem to be cool with it. I pull up in the HCHII. Get in the CRZ and gave up on the car at the 5 mile mark. The 6mt was a joke. Nothing like a current Si 6mt, or any other 6mt I've driven from Honda. The brakes where on par with a friction stick wal-mart go cart system. Very heavy rear bias. Fit, finish and trim were basic and so so. Fancy looking, cheap feeling, but Honda functional. It screamed fancy Yaris to me. NOT Honda! And I found no linage in CRZ that can be called CRX, a real Honda. I did not drive the car long enough to get into it mpg. It became very clear to me real fast. It did nothing well except look like a modern CRX.

Then on the trip home. What do I drive up on. A mint CRX in white paint. It was not the HF (?) or Si but the EX of it's time. All OEM Mint and slick as a button. Laura blurted out. Who's driving your mother old Honda here. LOL! I assured her it was not moms mint SI. We slid the HCHII in behind it. Yeah I was having a good drive home with 60+ mpg. But I know the CRX old school driver was in the mid 40's mpg wise and driving a car that would run off and leave the Civic and would make my MZ3 work for it's keep on the twisty's. It was a real Honda skate! :)

Honda's magic is in trouble!

Jeff

I guess I have a whole different take on the CR-Z. I look at it as an affordable sports coupe that is fun to drive and get's pretty decent gas mileage! I test drove both the ^MT and the CVT back to back and much prefer the CVT! I was peppier off the line and more responsive. It's also rated at much better gas mileage. We had a pretty extensive test drive in both and had ample time to play with the different driving modes while taking it through it's paces on both highways and back roads. It handles great, and in power mode feels really strong off the line to about 45 mph. I believe the electric motors in this Hybrid's maun function are engine assist, not fuel economy! Better gas mileage is a by product of the assist the electric engine give the ICE at launch and lower speeds. I think Honda missed the mark with their marketing of this car, I would say it falls more in line with the Lexus GS 450h Sports Sedan concept. Yes, it's a Hybrid, but it's made more for performance that gas mileage!

Bottom Line, if you're looking for a practical Hybrid that will deliver top notch gas mileage, get a Prius, Insight, or Civic Hybrid. But if you want an affordable, fun sport coupe that gets decent gas mileage, the CR-Z is worth looking at!

Well, psyschack! You're quite the kill-joy!

I just bought my CR-Z EX a week ago and I couldn't be happier!!! It's my first hybrid (and first Honda) after previously owning a 2007 Mini Coooper S automatic with paddle shifters and a 2005 S and 2002 standard prior to that. Maybe part of my extreme joy with the CR-Z is based on the fact that my 2007 Mini Cooper was such a piece of junk. A total mightmare almost from the start. Having to replace the engine (bent piston rod - no reason given for why THAT happened) 2,000 miles out of warranty on a car that wasn't even 3 years old did it for me. Got it back on Friday 9/12. Bought my CR-Z the next day. I bought one of the three in the dealer's first allotment. They were all sold within the first week.

Now it's like what Mini Cooper???

So far, I'm averaging 36.5 MPG in combo city/rural driving, much of which is rather hilly (I live in the TX Hill Country in Austin). The car handles great; maybe not as well as a Mini, but that's not what it's trying to accomplish. My take on the car is the same as Paul58's and I never expected anything differrent going into this purchase. I wanted better mileage, a sporty (not "sports") car that had good amenities and that's what I got. It has a MUCH better A/C unit than any of my Minis (or the 2001 MB CLK I had before those) and a "kick-a**" stereo. It's my first 2-seater, which is fine, since my rear seat in the Mini was usually folded down, anyway. And the ECO Drive system with its neat graphics and colors is giving me something to shoot for; better gas mileage and better driving habits.

This is the first time in many years I can say I actually love the car I'm driving.

Welcome to CleanMPG!

Hi Paul and CR-Zmarty:

Don't worry about Psy, "He hates everything" ;)

And welcome to CleanMPG!

Wayne

I am going to try to get to the local dealer this week for a drive. I want to make about a 40 mile run if possible.

They have a black one on display near the highway and I really like the looks of it.

Welcome! What mode are you using for most of your driving? Also, I didn't see if yours has the 6MT or the CVT.

Our local Zipcar office usually has a few interesting/sporty cars and a variety of hybrids, and since the CR-Z qualifies as BOTH I'm almost sure they'll pick up one or two of them within the next few months and make it available for us to rent (which in my case means taking it out for a 2-3 hour test drive). Will be an auto of course, but I'm sure it will still be a fun drive. Can't wait.

Nevyn,

I tried to post the other day, but somehow I got "signed-out" after I typed my whole response. FRUSTRATING!
Being that I live in the Texas Hill County, hypermiling is a bit of a chore. If I could figure out how to drive everywhere going downhill, I'd have it made!
I use the ECON setting for probably 80-90% of my driving. NORMAL for the steeper hills and when the inside of the car is hot (A/C is great in this car!), then switch to ECON on the fly. I use SPORT and the shift paddles for when I feel like driving the "twisties" around Lake Travis. I used to drive my Mini Cooper S Steptronic manually all the time, mainly because it got better mileage that way. The auto mode just kept the RPMs up too high for longer periods of time. The CVT in the CR-Z justs seems more comfortable driven in auto.

Well, I had the chance to test drive the CR-Z a couple of weeks ago for a whole day and after approximately 75 miles incurred in a mix of urban and suburban driving I managed to get roughly 61 MPG at the end of the day.

This was, by the way, in the CVT equipped model that I will hold for a week or so towards the end of this month. While I will also have the 6 speed MT at my disposal I am beginning to think the CVT model will be the easiest to pilot around on a daily basis while also the easiest to get good FE with.

CR-Zmarty:

I am quite confident that after you learn to apply a few basic techniques to the CR-Z, you should be able to reach the high 40's without much effort. Tackling hills on the CR-Z is not much different that what we do with any other Honda hybrid and even though the climbs may be heart-breaking there is still plenty you can do to lessen the hit and even more you can do on the descents to make up for the original loss. Proper DWL execution is key as is what we choose to do on the other side of the hills.

I still find the paddle shifters a little gimmicky but certainly more useful than the ones on the 2nd gen Insight. However, since my emphasis is FE I find the ECON mode to be the most reasonable with more than enough pep to get the car launched and even too much when emerging out of a twisty descent. :D

Overall I am quite impressed and I think I could actually see myself owning one. ;)

Cheers;

MSantos

Since you have had a chance to drive the CRZ and 2010 Prius, how do the mpg's compare? Thanks. Ted

msantos:

WOW! I'm impressed. 61 MPG. That gives me something to shoot for. I DEFINITELY have to study the hypermiling techniques much more. I've always been a somewhat fast driver (and the one in your rearview mirror when you're going below the speed limit in the left lane), so this is quite a change. I was able to squeeze out better mileage in the Mini S than most others did, according to one of the service mgrs. at one of the dealers I dealt with. We're talking upper 20s in the city.

I am pleased with the cruise control on the CR-Z. One of the hills here in Austin which I refer to as "The Big Hill" (and everyone seems to know what I'm talking about) is no match for the CR-Z. It may lose 1-2 MPH set at 65 in the NORMAL mode. The CVT sounds like it's making margaritas, but it does just fine. Going down "The Big Hill" in neutral is a terror, even for me. In gear, the CR-Z will hit 85, no problem (cops do not ticket here, as a rule). I haven't been able to let her role in neutral without traffic, but I'll try it sometime when there's no traffic (or cops). I don't know the grade, but it's about 3/4 of a mile from crest to foot and probably drops about 250 feet. It's an ear-popper, for sure.

Thank for your "insight". I'm off to tackle "The Big Hill" (in our Acura RL) and have breakfast.

Happy Hyper-ing!
Cr-Zmarty

So, you're all for tailgating, cop evasion and speeding? No offense, but that is the antithesis of improving fuel economy, not to mention increasing the odds of accidents and probability of serious injury or death in those accidents, both for yourself and those unfortunate enough to share the road with you.

Sorry for being a grumpy old man, but there it is.

Hi Mendel;

We're all grumpy at one point or another... so no big deal. ;)

What is important to remember is that many of us all started as something else, often as incorrigible lead-foots... and here we are sharing something in common, which no matter how small it may appear, is anything but trivial in the big scheme of things. It is a journey, but a good one to enjoy in the company of so many good and helpful folks. :D


Hi Ted;

The CR-Z is no Prius and frankly cannot even aspire to be one in the hands of an average Joe at least as far as MPG is concerned. The Prius is a larger car, with more utility, more passenger space, greater FE and a reputation that is nothing shorter than bullet proof... which in my view will easily fulfills the daily driving needs of more than 80% of the North American public. All it takes is a generally defensive driver behind the wheel and no knowledge of how the car works to get 50+ MPG out of a Prius.

However, there is no denying that the driving dynamics of the Prius do not and cannot even dream of matching the dynamics of some Honda hybrids let alone the CR-Z which was tuned to be the best handling hybrid... and in this area, boy does it deliver.

The CR-Z can still offer relatively good MPG but unlike the Prius, you must make the choice and drive as if you mean it and not only keep the car in ECON but also learn a few things about it along the way. Please note the following rule:

When it comes to Honda hybrid fuel economy, there is no such thing as engine break-in; just driver break-in. ;)


Cheers;

MSantos

... important to remember is that many of us all started as something else, often as incorrigible lead-footsHe's right, Marty. A lot of us mileage enthusiasts here on cleanmpg started out as driving enthusiasts of the more conventional type. Most of us have been there. And even though we've "reformed" our ways, many of us still enjoy cornering. :D

That said, I would encourage you to slow down. When I changed my ways, I saw an immediate 30% jump in my fuel economy. By immediate I mean over a period of TWO WEEKS. Sure it took longer to get where I was going, but by no more than about 10%. For a 30% savings in fuel, that seemed to me a no-brainer. My half hour commute may take 3 minutes longer, but big deal. I waste more than 3 minutes sitting on the toilet on the average day.

You'll find that most of us don't use cruise, and couldn't give a rat's a** whether our cruise could help us maintain 65 up a big hill. First of all, most of us never hit 65 except on long freeway drives or downhills, and even then many of us don't. Second, cruise is inefficient and you're a lot better off managing the throttle with your right foot. Third, with or without cruise none of us TRY to maintain speed up hills. One of the biggest techniques we have in our toolbox is DWL. You may not be comfortable holding the engine load absolutely steady -- on many hills that would cause your speed to drop dangerously low -- but you don't have to take it to extremes. The more you ease off on climbs -- even a little -- the better your mileage will be. In the last couple months I've improved my roadtrip records from 48mpg to 54mpg on our TDI, and from 37mpg to 42mpg on my gasser, just by finally mastering DWL. And the DWL payback is even bigger on hybrids.

And please, please, PLEASE do not tailgate! I don't care what moral law you think that left lane bandit is violating (and I probably agree with you) it is not worth endangering a human life over. Cars are deadly weapons and should be treated as such. Following too closely is the #1 cause of crashes (30%), by a WIDE margin (failure to yield and excessive speed are about 15% EACH). It accomplishes absolutely NOTHING except giving you an artificial ego boost and a feeling of power that is a complete illusion. Having been injured twice in rear-enders I will make a personal plea to you to PLEASE always leave at least a 2 second following distance no matter what. Please don't do to others what has been done to me.

I guess I'm a little crankier than usual, could be due to our local Honda dealership having only a CRZ hybrid (in the showroom, stickshift no less), current year HCHII's an ongoing no-show. With the rumoured replacement pending, no loss I guess.

Marty, MSantos is right, every journey starts with the first step, and so on. Seriously.

I agree, I've been lucky, accident wise. My father actually taught me how to drive when I was 11 (I'm now 48). Until I got my license at 16, I drove every weekend in the farmlands outside Chicago. I have never hit anyone in those 37 years, not even a parking lot tap. I have BEEN hit (twice), most recently in 2007, head-on by a drunk driver in Monroe, LA. I had to 2005 MiniCooper S which was totalled. He crossed the line, hitting me at about 45 MPH (I was going about 25). I sustained a friction burn on my left arm from the air bag, that's it. The drunk was almost killed. His daughter with him was OK.

Mendel, I agree. You could use a Xanax or 3!

I may have been fast off the line, but I rarely go 5-10 MPH over posted speed limits. Since the roadways near my home are mostly 4-lane sweeping curved high-speed (65 MPH limits slowing to 50-55 through business districts) YOU HAVE TO USE cruise control, otherwise you will be pulled over by Sheriff Andy or Deputy Fife! Believe me, I got out of 2 tickets by using the cruise. In one instance I had it set at 65. The sheriif clocked me at 68 coming towards him (on level ground) and 73 going away from him (uphill). When he pulled me over he said I was "going above the limit". At first, he was reluctant to tell me my speed. When I told him I had my cruise set, he let me go, mainly because there was such a discrepency in his readings. I also think it's not safe watching the gauges in the car and not watching the road. I'm using the CC.

I did try DWL (or as I always heard it called in the "olden days" - dead-pedalling) this morning on "The Big Hill". Luckily, there were no other vehicles nearby. I hit the base of the hill, at 60 (posted limit), watching my IFE gauge to keep it steady. By the time I reached the top, I was doing barely 20 MPH. Now, if I had done that in traffic, Bubba in his F-250 duallie would be driving over me, no matter what lane I was in. Sorry, but I'm not going to put myself in the position of being a road obstacle, which is what you become driving that way. I'm WAY more comfortable speeding than doing that. The 1/10th of a MPG or whatever I save is not worth becoming a speed bump.

I have always enjoyed driving. Yes, I do want to save fuel. Hell, that was the point of buying a hybrid (although I think many use it as a panacea for speeding - they wouldn't know hypermiling from a hole in the ground). And I do want to change my driving habits. But I don't want driving to become a chore for me and not an enjoyment.

By the way, the Honda dealer where I bought my CR-Z has about 2O Insights and 10 HCHII's and 3 CR-Z's (CVT). Stopped by today to get my new license plates.

Just a little salt in the wound, Mendel!

I did try DWL (or as I always heard it called in the "olden days" - dead-pedalling) this morning on "The Big Hill". Luckily, there were no other vehicles nearby. I hit the base of the hill, at 60 (posted limit), watching my IFE gauge to keep it steady. By the time I reached the top, I was doing barely 20 MPH. Now, if I had done that in traffic, Bubba in his F-250 duallie would be driving over me, no matter what lane I was in. Sorry, but I'm not going to put myself in the position of being a road obstacle, which is what you become driving that way. I'm WAY more comfortable speeding than doing that. The 1/10th of a MPG or whatever I save is not worth becoming a speed bump..

You don't have to let your speed drop to dangerously low speeds to gain. You gain simply by using less power than you would need to keep your speed steady uphill. Just use as much power as you need based on traffic conditions.

I have a couple of hills on my commute where I would need to go well into the power zone to maintain the 55mph PSL. On both hills the following descent is long and sufficient to regain speed with little or no power:
- with somebody following I'll maintain speed.
- with somebody in view but not really close I'll allow speed to drop to around 50mph.
- without nobody in view behind me I'll allow speed to drop as low as 30mph.

I am a downhill speed cheat as I allow my speed to exceed PSL downhill so I have momentum to keep the power down uphill, but I'd never try to justify it by erecting a straw man.

A simple glance at the speedo every 5-10s is all I need for maintaining speeds properly without CC.

Thanks msantos, I was all set to get the CRZ until I saw the MPG rating and having previously ascertained that the Insight 2 would give me 12 mpg less than the Prius 3 over my 30 miles test run, I went with the Prius. Coming from an Insight 1 with a lifetime mpg of 62 and summer mileage of 70, both were a come down, but with the Prius I am getting over 60 mpg summer, so I guess my lifetime mpg will be 56 maybe. Not too bad for a 3100 # car compared to the Insight1 1800#. But the Prius handling feels more like a tank compared to the Insight1 & 2. ( love those twisty mountain roads reminds me of those motor cycling days). So all in all, I like the Prius but always eye the CRZ when I see one and think - if they had only given it the mpg of the Insight 1, I would have bought it.

I was driving my CR-Z to the gym this morning and tried maintaining speed myself instead of using the CC. I noticed the instant FE was at about 25-35 with my right foot doing the work at 55 MPH. I then hit the CC button and the instant FE immediately surged to 50+ (this while in ECON mode). I just get better mileage that way. Always have. I like driving at a constant speed and don't like being near those that don't.
I've also noticed with Hondas I drive (we also have a 2005 Acura RL) that the throttles are very "heavy", for search of a better term. More resistant, maybe. My Mini was MUCH easier to hold a speed with than the RL or the CR-Z. I occasionaly drive the RL to work, thinking I'm doing 55-60. I'd look at the speedo and I'd be doing 40 (oddly, the RL feels like it's going faster than it actually is, considering how "insulated" it is from the driving experience). My CR-Z's throttle is the same, which I guess is a good thing. I actually developed a shin splint in my right leg from having to push so much more. Tha pain has finally subsided.
I guess the hybrid thing is rubbing off, My partner just got the best mileage in the 5 years he's owned the RL: 21 MPG in the city. We did acheive 27 highway MPG on a trip to Arkansas last year.
He's getting the New Car Bug, but he has only 1 payment left and new tires. He's going to look at the Sonata Hybrid when it comes out.

I'm glad CRZ owners are enjoying there cars!

I wanted so much to want this car it wasn't funny. All be it I learned my lesson buying first year new gen cars when I purchased my 06 Civic EX. So It would have been atleast two years before I would have purchased one unless my dealer called with a $6k price off MSRP and threw in a top of the line extended warranty for free. Then I might have bitten. :)

I'm usually leary of first-year cars, also. But being that it is a Honda and it is based on the Insight, I was pretty confident. I had one of the first Minis in 2002. It was the best of the 3 I had. Only problem I had was a bad alternator. My 2007 S was the first year for the second gen and it was junk. And I've always heard never by an American car the first year, no matter who makes it.

This is also the first car I've had since my 2001 Chevy Tracker that hasn't had to go back to the dealer for something within the first month of owership. That includes my 2001 MB CLK320, my partner's 2001 530i and 3 Minis.

Getting 40 MPG is still boggling my mind!

Anyone have any 0-60 numbers?
Maybe one of the Car Rags has tested it?
Just curious how quick it is.
It is maybe 20% down vs the Prius in FE, so I would hope it is suitable quicker-.
A Honda Accord V-6 does it in under 6 seconds-gets close to 35 mpg at 60 mph.
Yes I know acceleration isn't all there is to being sporty, but....

Thanks
Charlie

Hi Charlie;

According to those who have measured it... and for what it is, not very fast at all (as in: not less than 9 seconds).

I am currently doing a week-long CleanMPG test of 2 CR-Z's (a CVT model and a 6MT, with a head-to-head review coming up) and I find either of them to provide more than enough power to the wheels.
Then again, I am not the one to even try a hard acceleration test as in my "religion", that amounts to extreme heresy. :D

Cheers;

MSantos

msantos
Thanks for the info.
So these new CRXs are maybe a little bit quicker than the originals, but no one would describe them as "fast" or quick.They are faster than the HCH2 (12.5 0-60) but much slower accelerating than a 4 cyl Accord(mid 8 0-60)

Do/will it outhandle the originals-assume updated tires and maybe fancier shocks/springs on the CRXs?

Are they fun to drive? More fun than a Prius(very low bar)?-more fun than a MT 4 cyl Civic-?- what about a Focus or Mazda 3?

I generally consider a car "good "if it gets great mpg-that is it for me now. Why else would I own a Prius-mpg-not for its fun to drive quotient.

Honda is selling this as a fun to drive "tuner" type Hybrid?
I see Psyshack's problem with it. It should be better-much much better than the original CRX. Is it?
If you installed a 200 hp 2.4 4 cyl in it-with a 6 speed MT with a very tall 6th gear-it would be a sportier car-forget the hybrid aspect-just make it light ,small and fast with decent aerodynamics and very tall 6th gear(hy).
I'm not sure Honda hit the mark with this car.What were they aiming for?
Charlie

I think you hit on the problem. It's hard to hit a dozen different targets with a single arrow.

PaleMelanesian

What they delivered was a car with roughly Insight MPG- but less than 4 cyl Civic performance-and a price above both. Like you say-they missed because they tried to nail too many targets.



Imagine a Hotrod Prius- it has the bigger motor already-BUT PUT IN A 1.5X -2X electric motor-maybe one from a Camry or Highlander- it would be a 7 second 0-60 car. Yes, there would be a 10%-15% mpg penalty, but it would be quickish.Not sure just who it would appeal to, but...
Charlie

Imagine a Hotrod Prius- it has the bigger motor already-BUT PUT IN A 1.5X -2X electric motor-maybe one from a Camry or Highlander- it would be a 7 second 0-60 car. Yes, there would be a 10%-15% mpg penalty, but it would be quickish.Not sure just who it would appeal to, but...
Charlie

My wife. She finds the Prius a bit unresponsive even in PWR mode. Your Prioomph would be more to her tastes.

ItsNotAbout- yes me too-I would probably actually save my money and buy a Camry or Highlander "motored" Prius.

Maybe a 180 hp ICE(could be a 4 cyl easily enough) 100-120 HP electric with 200 lb ft.

Now I would find a way to pay $30,000 for one of them.

The weight would balloon to 3200 lbs probably-No free lunch-heavier ICE, heavier electric motor, more BP- But fun is worth something, and it could still get very close to 50 mpg hy at 60 mph. City would suffer-maybe 45 mpg -not 51.

Honda just missed on this car-not enough zip.

Charlie

I would really like a stretched Prius-190"-for roadtrips- carry all the dogs, cats, humans on trips and evacuations-(just 2 humans and one dog on vacation)

I think you hit on the problem. It's hard to hit a dozen different targets with a single arrow.Agreed - they need to make a good niche car instead of the next great car.

phoebeisis:
Anyone have any 0-60 numbers?

My highly scientific testing (buddy with a chronograph) yielded the following at full throttle - A/C off (CVT):

ECON mode: 11.2 sec

NORMAL mode: 8.9 sec

SPORT mode: 7.8 sec

SPORT mode using 7-speed paddles: 7.5 sec

CR-Zmarty- Thanks!-This kinda changes everything.
7.5- not too bad really.It is much much faster than the original CRX.
If this is correct(I'll check to moto mags times),I might have to revise my opinion.
Still, this is just a bit better than a 4 cyl Accord and much much slower than a 6 cyl Accord.

7 speed paddles on a CVT- more Honda magic allowing some real control over that CVT-??

So, is there any practical way to hotrod it?

7.5 is not bad-not the 5.9 of the Hybrid Accord, or the even quicker current 6 cyl Accord(or Camry, or any other current 6 cyl)-roughly what a warmed over Civic will do-maybe the SI Civic?

7.5 is waaaay faster than 9 seconds.Not quick, but not a fake sporty car either.Will it smoke the tires-drift if required-harder with FWD- it is FWD, right?

Thanks
Charlie
PS- I will try to see if the moto mags have tested it-I'll post what I find. XCEL will kinda wonder about all the reformed hotrodders here reverting to form(just kidding).

I checked Motortrend

Their times with the 6 speed MT
0-60= 8.3 seconds
1/4 mile 16.4 83.6 mpg.

These are almost exactly what a late model VW Golf TD got in a recent comparison.

Charlie

So the CVT is significantly faster than the 6MT? Could this just be from elimination of clutching pauses?

I checked with my dealer yesterday concerning CRZ. They are selling them for $388 above invoice. They had a CV-spit-spit-T in stock. I thought what the hell. I will drive up there and give that one a test drive. The wife is out of town for the weekend. So I got time to burn. :)

I was over half way to my dealer when my salesman called and told me the CRZ had just sold. Cars move fast at my dealer. And it was the only one they had. He didn't want me to waste a trip as it's a 50 miles drive to the dealer from my office. Seeing I was 35 miles into the trip I kept going. After all I could drink coffee smoke a few cigs and watch from a far as a owner took possession of a new car. That new car smile is priceless. :) Plus I had already settled into a solid 50 mpg run in the always composed MZ3.

As luck would have it the salesman introduced us. I was given the honor of being the resident dealership hypermiler. :) With a evil side. :D I gave them some pointers and a very quick clinic. The new owner did not seem very excited about the possibility's of massive mpg over epa. But was hoping to enjoy the car and get typical Honda over epa numbers. He did show basic interest in wanting to understand the hybrid system and understand the basics of battery management. The hybrid system introduction may have help'ed with him wanting to put in a massive audio upgrade. I showed him my Bass-Link in the trunk of the MZ3 and stressed to him that would be the very most I would do to introduce a tad of thump to any hybrid. Electrical draw and weight kill's hybrids. It's a fine line we walk.

He was also interested in a wheel and tire upgrade. I cautioned him concerning this. And to do it right will cost a very pretty penny IMHO. I shared with him the average / common wheel and tire packages folks buy for cosmetic improvement will take 2 to 4 mpg off your over all mpg. And if done completely wrong will ruin the cars handling and acceleration. I shared with him what I've been looking at for wheel/tires and sway bars for the HCHII. It's not cheap and comprise will have to be made concerning mpg.

He had a evil twinkle in his eye. He is not a kid. I recognized the glimmer of past glory in his face and physical body engilsh. He was indeed very comfortable in the cockpit of his new car. :) Then the question was asked. How will CRZ hold up to other cars in its class? I started out with,, It is in it's own class to date except for the 7th gen hybrid Accord and maybe a Lexus. I told him,,, Don't be picking fights in this car. Yaris, Fit, Smart entry level Rollas, Elantras and such will be easy pickings more than likely. Do Not Think you can roll with anything that say's Si in OEM condition, adult driven. Trying a MZ3 like mine will result in the Mazda chewing you up and spitting out little Honda Cub 50's. You may hang well with a 5AT 8th gen Civic. But a 5MT 8th gen will spank you IMHO as a past owner of such a car. I reminded him there is a very active SCCA Chapter in Tulsa that would love to see him give the CRZ a Auto Cross work out. :)

I shared with the gentalman where he could find us and he was more than welcome to stop by, join up and share with us about his CRZ. :D

As for me. I just can't get into the car. It does not have CRX magic. It's mission seems far to blurred and way out of focus. Of small Honda coupes it seems lost. Again NO CRX magic, NO (real) Insight magic. And it does not seem to have the refinement of current production R-18 coupes. Nor the manors. It does not seem to have the light feel of a Fit with want to be flea type movement ability's. Between the CRX and want to be Insight I have found respect for the Fit I never had before. Of the Fit spin off's ,,,, The Fit is still the best of the three IMO >>>> Less the important mpg numbers.

RightLane
Motortrend didn't comment on the CVT.
Usually moto mag guys tear the heck out of cars trying to max the 0-60 and 1/4 mile times, so the 8.3 is probably a very good time for a CR-Z.

How did your buddy know he was doing 60 mph?
My guess-just a guess- is 7.5 is too much quicker to be explained by just time lost to shifting- but Isn't the CVT supposed to keep it at 6000 RPMs(just a guess ) the whole time? No 6000 dropping to 4000, 6000 dropping to 4500, 6000 dropping to 5000 and such..
Do CVTs- usually beat the MT versions(maybe Nissan makes same/same cars with MT vs CVT) in 0-60? I'm guessing they could but .8 seconds is a lot.

Why would anyone buy a MT if the CVT was that much quicker? Quick is pretty much everything in a sporty car-quick acceleration, quick deceleration, quick change in direction- QUICK is it !

I know Psyshack loves his CVT in his HCH2. He has frequently, very frequently, commented on what a fine piece of equipment it is.
I would be disappointed that it was only as quick as a 3100 lb 5 passenger 140 hp TD Golf.
Swing and a miss by Honda.

Charlie

phoebeisis:
Anyone have any 0-60 numbers?

My highly scientific testing (buddy with a chronograph) yielded the following at full throttle - A/C off (CVT):

ECON mode: 11.2 sec

NORMAL mode: 8.9 sec

SPORT mode: 7.8 sec

SPORT mode using 7-speed paddles: 7.5 sec

I would like to see some video of a CRX pulling those numbers. Brand new my 06 Civic Sedan 5mt was a solid 8 - 7.5 second 0-60 car. After break in that went to 7.5 - 7.0 bone stock. With under 7.0 if a good launch was at hand and 1st to 2nd shift was smooth and quick. Only first and second gear used for it's best times. After all it was a Honda and liked to rev. :) When brand new third gear was used.

RightLane
Motortrend didn't comment on the CVT.
Usually moto mag guys tear the heck out of cars trying to max the 0-60 and 1/4 mile times, so the 8.3 is probably a very good time for a CR-Z.

How did your buddy know he was doing 60 mph?
My guess-just a guess- is 7.5 is too much quicker to be explained by just time lost to shifting- but Isn't the CVT supposed to keep it at 6000 RPMs(just a guess ) the whole time? No 6000 dropping to 4000, 6000 dropping to 4500, 6000 dropping to 5000 and such..
Do CVTs- usually beat the MT versions(maybe Nissan makes same/same cars with MT vs CVT) in 0-60? I'm guessing they could but .8 seconds is a lot.

Why would anyone buy a MT if the CVT was that much quicker? Quick is pretty much everything in a sporty car-quick acceleration, quick deceleration, quick change in direction- QUICK is it !

I know Psyshack loves his CVT in his HCH2. He has frequently, very frequently, commented on what a fine piece of equipment it is.
I would be disappointed that it was only as quick as a 3100 lb 5 passenger 140 hp TD Golf.
Swing and a miss by Honda.

Charlie


Charlie

I wanted CRZ to be much more with less. My CRZ would be a show case and benchmark effort to high light the new Honda with grass root Honda engineering. My CRZ would have been the show case for a reworked R-18 in hybrid fashion. The interior would be edgy. But not look like a transformer studio team designed it. While I hate the parrot fish mouth looking grill on CRZ. The production version looks better than the prototype. I think the car would look great in a stealth out denim black with the windows tinted. :D If only to take that damn grill out as a visual focal point. My CRZ would slot into a wide open area as a best in class between Civic Coupe and Si anything. And define the effort with a engineering ability to make a modern CRX that encompass's HF to Si in one tidy little package. From wicked mpg getter to a birth of a Bonsai fun tweaky little mpg getter. And if anybody could do it. Honda could have in spades! And to be honest! I think taking a 1.3 out of the HCHII and putting a turbo on it was a valid option also. With a good dose of of IMA. Then maybe Sport, Normal and Eco would have truly amazing differences. I could enjoy a tri-polar car. :shade::shade::shade:

This car in the hands of Honda Engineers had the chance to be the small eco all around ricer base car with a touch or GT touring flavor and a real cool city presence.

Sooooo Honda has swung the bat. Will Yota bring out a Spider type car full of there hybrid tech? Will this spur Ford/Mazda to unleash there engineers. Whats Fiat got up there sleeve's? Is Nissan truly caught up in engineering muck and myer. Does GM have something in Volt for the future like they did once before in a different time. That gave us Impala to Camaro? Can we the American tax payer and GM produce a game changing car and a platform that will make us proud? Can the Germans put out a under engineered game changing car like the Beetle again with all it's campish splendor?

While I question the CRZ's execution. I'm at least thankful for Honda's marketing effort. And limited investment of a hybrid fun car and putting it on the lot for sale. ( it is a bin car :( ) I hope it sells good enough to make the other manufactures take note.

Jeff,

I share the disappointment that the CR-Z is not the 80's CRX, even considering the upgraded safety and emissions standards.

One button does not truly toggle the CR-Z from CRX HF, to CRX DX, to CRX Si.

Jeff,

I share the disappointment that the CR-Z is not the 80's CRX, even considering the upgraded safety and emissions standards.

One button does not truly toggle the CR-Z from CRX HF, to CRX DX, to CRX Si.

Chuck

And it's almost politically correct. :eyebrow:

Would you like it better if I just said it sucks? :D

I somehow just noticed that the electric motor is just 13 hp?
13 hp???WTF is the point in 13 hp?? Where did they parts bin it-from the original Insight?
It is an absolute miracle that a 122 hp car can do a 8.3 0-60.
And it doesn't get great MPG.
Slow, a bit pricey, so so FE, 2 seats- sign me up!

Those 2.4 Corollas will bury this car.A Honda "sports car" smashed by a Corolla! Will it reliably beat a 4 cyl Camry?


Psyshack if I was a Honda partisan -I am a little bit of a Honda fan, but not a Honda nut- I would absolutely cry over this car.
Well, maybe it will sell ok.I feel for Honda.They are getting a bit like Dodge-nothing anyone really wants to buy(other than the Cummins Ram because it is so much cheaper than the other diesel 3/4 and 1 tons-good motor,too thirsty but good) .
Charlie

With electric motors it's not the HP that counts, it's the torque. That torque also maxes out at a much lower RPM than a gas engine. That little motor is a bit more effective than you think. :)

With electric motors it's not the HP that counts, it's the torque. That torque also maxes out at a much lower RPM than a gas engine. That little motor is a bit more effective than you think. :)

Sean the problem is,,, the limited amount of shear TQ is exhausted in mear milli seconds and there is not enough HP in the EM to make a smooth transition concerning the ICE TQ and HP curves. Throw in a Honda CVT to date and you have rpm and disgusting forward movement. And the whole time you have a wonderful Honda ICE going to waste, not to mention and now all most after thought IMA system all but getting in the way. <<<<<< that does suck!!!! Hondas FE and attention to mother nature and fun factor has always been ICE based.

I would rather have the option to buy a Honda 3 door hatch with a 6MT or a double clutch floppy paddle tranny in a updated turbo diesel. With the ICE shockingly reminding me. <<<<<< Hey I bet you didn't know I could do this. Or hey do this and I will give you 80 mpg @ 70 mph with a simple pulse and bleed drive down I-40. Of which I have never done. But beleive is possible. And full lean burn throttle control. And then throw in hybrid on the high end as diesel TQ fades. Well it does not fade. It just flat out stops. LMAO Save the copper and make the IMA system higher rpm responsive as dictated by how deep your foot is buried in the throttle. And give it the ability to completely decouple from the drive line when the packs full and your in low load high mpg,, be it slow or at speed for gods sake!!!!!

Or could it be Honda has shot there wad on the Robot? Honda-Jet seems to be dead at this time. There lawn mowers and generators are now clearly over priced for what you get and they are China-Marketing there simple utility ice's out to Wal-Mart fodder and others. The motorcycle division is a world wide market main stay. But at the enthusiast level in most displacements and markets they are cellar dwellers.

If Yamaha ever decides to build cars. Honda and Yota will be in big trouble. And Mazda will be the only ones to bring a challenge if they pull there head out.

Rightlane
It is always the HP that matters- if the gearing is right. Torque doesn't make you accelerate fast-HP and gearing do.
13 hp and 50 lb ft(or whatever it is) might be ok from 0-15 mph but at any other speeds 13 hp is just not enough to accelerate a 2700 lb vehicle very much.

This is a slow car-and the electrics just kinda get in the way.
Like Jeff said/implied- just put more Honda 4 stroke in there with some lean burn trickery and lots of gearing-forget about the hybrid. The old Insight didn't get great hy mpg because of the electrical trickery- it was all Honda ICE at hy speeds.
The Prius doesn't get great hy mpg because of the electrical trickery(though I suspect that the electrical trickery allows the low hy rpms-it kicks in to prevent lugging at 1400 rpms)

Yeah, Honda has lost the hybrid battle to Toyota, but so has everyone else. GM's hybrid might be slightly better hy and towing, but it is sooo expensive no one will buy it for FE.

Honda should look for a better way-maybe flywheel hybrid power-like F1. Honda can't beat the Prius family for city FE in a car sized vehicle. The TDs can't either.

My usual refrain is coming-the Prius is just too good-forget about matching it for city FE.
It has put paid to the original Insight, the HCH2, the newest Insight, and it will sink the little TDs if they try to compete in the $23000 range.

If Toyota thought there was $$ to be made in this segment-sporty Hybrids-they would stuff a Camry or Highlander drivetrain in a reworked Prius , fat tires, stiff suspension and that would be it(they have already done this-but it is a running concept car not slated for production)
Honda needs to be Honda-sweet ICE with lean burn and lots of gearing don't imitate Toyota.
It always comes down to The Prius(Toyota) is too good to beat-city-using electric motors.Toyota is too good, too well funded and too far ahead to be beaten by its own concept.

Rightlane
It is always the HP that matters- if the gearing is right. Torque doesn't make you accelerate fast-HP and gearing do.
13 hp and 50 lb ft(or whatever it is) might be ok from 0-15 mph but at any other speeds 13 hp is just not enough to accelerate a 2700 lb vehicle very much.


Hi Charlie;

Not always and certainly not in this case. Sean is correct.

The whole principle behind IMA is that the torque contribution of the electric motor is the single most important design attribute of the chosen hybridization path.
Boosting of the Horse Power never was the end result of this design especially when Honda opted for a compact high density synchronous DC motor (still one of the highest density in the world)

I will make Honda's case with the following image:

http://www.cleanmpg.com/photos/data/522/power-torque_curves.jpg

The whole point behind this design is that it allows for this specific motor design to produce and deliver almost all the torque the ICE produces at its most effective RPM range (typically very high) but with just 15-20 KWh rating... and it does so at just 1000-1500 RPM which is where the tiny 1.3L ICE is at its weakest.

By the way, this is also a training point typically delivered to Honda technicians.

Is a high FE IMA equipped Honda a race car? Definitely not, but ask any average HCH-II owner how their car performs without any electric assist and you will get the true revelation. With electric assist this car will only manage a 12.2 sec from 0-60 but without any assist you'll be lucky to get a 16-17 sec rating.


Cheers;

MSantos

Maybe somewhat analogous to use of a powered sub-woofer in a home theater system:

The SW handles the extreme low end, doing two things: handling that range, and allowing the other speakers to be tuned more efficiently, with higher cut-offs.

Charlie

TQ gets you moving, HP keeps you moving.

msantos

I get your point -thanks for the chart-but I have a slightly different take on it.
I look at all that torque-almost doubling it-from about 95 to about 170 at 1000 RPMs!!

BUT THE CR-Z IS STILL AN ABSOLUTE DOG-8.3- 0-60 despite all that torque because adding 13 hp is still just 13 hp, and energy added per unit of time is what makes something accelerate harder.

A Honda 2 liter ICE could add maybe 100 hp at 6500 rpms and maybe 50 hp at 3500 RPMs- vs the 13 hp the electric motor adds.

I'm not arguing against electrical assist; I'm arguing against TOO LITTLE ELECTRICAL ASSIST!! Heck,I own a Prius-that little sucker really kinda jumps from 15 mph to 45 mph for such a low hp vehicle.

The naysayers on the CR-Z are saying that Honda tried to hit too many targets-performance(acceleration, handling), good mpg-so they ended up with too much of a compromise vehicle.
It isn't fast, and it doesn't get great mpg!
It is a slowish sporty car with poorish mpg for a Hybrid.

If Honda had just gone all in with a 220 hp 2 liter ICE-plenty of gears and lean burn so it could get great hy mpg(maybe turn 1600 RPMS at 60 mph) it would be
1)Kinda fast-maybe close to 6.0 0-60 if it weighed just 2600 lbs.
2)Good hy FE- maybe 40+ mpg- hy mpg at 60 mph

Granted it wouldn't get 35 mpg city- it would get roughly what a 2.4 liter Corolla gets-not sure what that is.

On the other hand they could go with bigger output electric motor-like Toyota. But the Prius family is already there-Honda can't win that fight.

We agree that electric motors are great car motors(assisting or standing alone)- but we disagree on how "good" this particular car is.
Seems like Honda didn't play to their strength here.The CR-Z needs more power-a lot more power-sweet Honda revving 4 stroke power.
Charlie

PS We are all showing our hot rodder roots. Torque vs HP-

Hi Charlie;

I certainly agree on most points, that is for sure.

However, I would not write-off the CR-Z concept completely yet. And since this is CleanMPG and we still care more about MPG than fast acceleration times, we may have a bit more to say on the capabilities of these cars when driven for FE.

Wayne already showed what is possible when you put a true FE expert behind the wheel and very soon we'll be able to demonstrate what anyone can achieve with the MT6 and CVT models when these are driven defensibly and with the basic CMPG hypermiling toolkit under the belt. :D :D

Stay tuned for our week-long Head to Head review of two CR-Z's: One with a 6MT and the other with a CVT. A few surprises are likely in store. :D

Look I am a Prius (2G and 3G) owner too and the CR-Z is no Prius when it comes to MPG, no matter how you slice it. Heck, it gets buried but all other Honda hybrids too (except the accord hybrid).
But... while we can smile in a Prius while commuting to work in pure FE bliss, the same cannot be said about its driving dynamics. Even though I do not enjoy the analogy, the 2G Prius is understandably called an appliance by some and the 3G is better but still did not do much to improve this legacy and the purists mock it for that.

The CR-Z in the other hand almost begs to be tossed into turns and while not as good a car for commuting FE it is fun to drive on the weekends at the track. It looks fast too and not many of these so-called "purists" disagree.

Besides, keep an eye on the tuner market too. While it has more than enough power for me, power boosting kits already exist to make up for the claims of "lesser" acceleration. :D

Maybe Honda is on to something after all.


Cheers;

MSantos

Besides, keep an eye on the tuner market too. While it has more than enough power for me, power boosting kits already exist to make up for the claims of "lesser" acceleration.

And this is what Honda was hoping. Civics are not fast from production, but with the aftermarket support, they have been made into an icon.

Then the Honda Hybrids tunable? You can hotrod the ICE easily enough?

I've never heard of anyone hotrodding a Prius.Not sure it is possible since the ICE and electric motor are so tightly integrated.

Just wish Honda had given it more ICE to begin with-lot more ICE.Toyota has managed to improve the Prius's mpg with a bigger ICE.

I read somewhere that Honda is considering a Hotrod version of the CR-Z?

We'll see.
Charlie

PS- JustBringIt- most Civics are still "not fast" after getting the usual RICER treatment (oversized horrible sounding exhaust, cheesy graphics, various ground effects crap with a worthless spoiler on the rear, worthless CAI, neon tube looking LEDs, way too big wheels).

Hi Charlie;

As a hybrid, the CR-Z is the least hybrid of all Hybrids Honda produced to date - bar none. Let put it into a meaningful perspective here:

You know how many folks call the typical Honda hybrid a "Mild Hybrid" ? Technically, this is blatantly incorrect (blame Ford's marketing arm for popularizing the mistake) but the CR-Z is so much less hybrid than for instance, the 2nd Gen Insight that some may swear that it easily crossed from the usual "power assist hybridization" into the "Start-Stop, mild-hybrid zone".

So, is this car tunable? You bet, and if I am correct the kits are already out there to prove it.

Cheers;


MSantos

PS- JustBringIt- most Civics are still "not fast" after getting the usual RICER treatment (oversized horrible sounding exhaust, cheesy graphics, various ground effects crap with a worthless spoiler on the rear, worthless CAI, neon tube looking LEDs, way too big wheels).

Sorry Charlie, but this is 180 deg. from what I'm talking about. What you are talking is not performance enhancement. That is your typical ricer setup.

I'm leaning more towards the strength of the internals and transmission to withstand boost pressures and roominess inside the engine bay for turbocharging or supercharging. Hondas and Toyotas are known to be able to withstand actual hp modifications without having to worry about building up every other part of the car to compensate.

Now that there is an electric motor worth 13hp. Who's to say someone wont be able to juice that up to say 20hp with a different motor? You can almost pick and choose any hp/TQ combination when it comes to these electric motors limited by size of course. But if there is room in the engine bay, all you need is the right coupler.

I've personally not seen the engine bay of the CR-Z, but the "sky's the limit" mentality that comes with hondas are one of the reasons people aspire to build these things. My car for instance would need to have a rebuilt transmission in order to have any additional power. Internals would have to be forged to have anything over 7psi and the engine bay has ZERO spare room.

So a typical Honda crank can take 15 psi of boost or a 100 HP shot of Nitrous with no problem?

I kinda wondered about that.

No,I don't consider the Ricer stuff to be performance improvements, but I see 50 of them for every Civic with Nitrous(much more common than turbocharging or any other supercharger)
Charlie

So a typical Honda crank can take 15 psi of boost or a 100 HP shot of Nitrous with no problem?

I kinda wondered about that.

No,I don't consider the Ricer stuff to be performance improvements, but I see 50 of them for every Civic with Nitrous(much more common than turbocharging or any other supercharger)
Charlie

Charlie-

Turbo'd civic are actually fairly popular- I looked into doing it for the EX. A stock Honda B16/D17 can safely get up to ~200hp with bolt-ons + blower, beyond that the connecting bolts are the limiting factor.

warthog-

So it is actually the connecting rod bolts that are the weak links-they stretch and then break?

200 HP would be maybe 10-12 psi boost depending on whether there is an effective intercooler.

In NOLA the tuner movement isn't really big.They mainly just do the RICE treatment-worthless CAI worthless noisy exhaust, lots of add on plastic junk).I'm not a CAI and header fan-the OEM stuff is just so good, and Honda is pretty clever with intake and exhaust tuning. Aftermarket engineers aren't going to beat Honda in part throttle 4 stroke tuning with drive by wire throttles.

I hope Honda makes it.I seem to remember the CEO of Honda- several years ago-was very concerned about Honda being able to compete with Toyota for this very reason.Honda didn't have the $$ to R&D against Toyota.They were going to lose the long term battle against Toyota because of R&D funding.

I'm a Honda fan-and a Toyota "disliker" so I hope Honda makes it.Honda always built the efficient ,safe cars we needed(ignored what we thought we wanted-V-8s etc)
Charlie

The 2JZ motor from Toyota can withstand massive amounts of power. Aftermarket usually follows after a brand also. Case in point:

A 2001 chrysler sebring coupe is a 2001 dodge stratus coupe is a mitsubishi eclipse. You'll never find aftermarket parts for the first two, however they are plentiful for the eclipse.

warthog-

So it is actually the connecting rod bolts that are the weak links-they stretch and then break?



Charlie-

Not the connecting rod bolts, the stock bolts (studs?) that connect the top and bottom end- they will deform and shear off under high HP when modded.

phoebeisis -
How did my buddy know I was doing 60MPH? By looking at the speedometer (Helen Keller would be able to see that thing!). He rode shotgun and leaned over my shoulder. As I said, it was not a scientific test.

As far as the 6MT in comparison, I don't know. The mileage IS better in the CVT, mainly because it does the power range hunting for itself. It's not as fast as my '07 MCS, but I really don't miss the little power difference(when it ran). The higher mileage trumps the amount of power given up.
I did surprise myself at a red light tonight on the way hme. Had "Dana" (yes, I name my cars - she's named after a good friend of mine) in ECON as usual. The light turned green and I immediately pushed the gas about half-way down (usually, I let off the gas and let the her start to roll before touching the peddle) and chirped the front tires. I checked the ECON button, thinking I was in NORMAL, but she was in ECON mode. Did not try that in SPORT yet.

Well, Honda-philes may not like this car, but I think it's fantastic. I've had her almost a month now and I look forward to every chance I get to drive her. The only other Honda product that I really liked driving was our 1986 Acura Integra LS 4-door hatch. It was #001016,; one of the first. It was a 5MT and it only had 110 HP, but it was fun. We also had a 1992 Vigor GS, which was nice. Wasn't thrilled about the long hood look of that car, but it was not the car I normally drove. Never even thought of a CR-X as a car choice. I guess I easily dismissed 2-seaters as not being practical at that time.

So I guess some of you will just continue to wring your hands and crunch your numbers over this car and call it junk. Go ahead. I'm enjoying it immensely!

Marty, please don't take away the impression that everyone here thinks the CR-Z is junk. Personally I think it's great.

CR-Zmarty Not junk- it is just our hotrodder USA HP bias showing thru.Besides,I've never driven one, so what would I know.
I didn't like those tiny low HP Limey "sports cars" (MG,MGB,TR anything(except the TR8)) either, so what do I know.

Glad you love it-we-me- are just whining because we are still hp junkies.
Charlie

I'm just giving you guys a hard time!

For those who asked; yes, there are already companies with aftermarket accesories for CR-Zs. Unless you are somehow lowering the weight of the car (while maybe boosting the power through CORRECT engine add-ons), you are defeating the purpose of the car. There is a forum specifically for the CR-Z that shows a black EX modded out. I'm sorry, but just because it's a Honda, DOES NOT mean it needs a "fart can"!

I have thought of removing the spare tire and donning a set of run-flats to help lighten my CR-Z. I haven't and probably won't weigh the spare and the accompanying tools, but I wonder it that would be a help. I know it wouldn't offset the cost of a set of run-flats for many years. It would also affect the front-rear weight bias to the detriment of its handing. Any thoughts?

I like the CRZ as is and it is a tuner's car! They were modding it in Japan before it even hit the shores here. Lot's of companies are going after the aftermarket parts.

http://www.cleanmpg.com/photos/data/501/CRZ_hot.jpg

Heck- forget those run flats.I bet they are heavier than "normal tires"
Just get some plugs-a cheap pump and a AAA membership and a cell phone with a tolerant wife on the other end(to bring the spare). For long trips-reinstall that spare.

Spares are plenty heavy.
My steel 235/75 15 weighs 57 lbs- a tiny compact spare is probably 20-30 lbs( 1%).

I pulled my third row- 78 lbs- part of the second row-about 55 lbs-some of the carpet and padding( 20 lbs) but mainly because of a leak that constantly soaked it(roughly 3% of the vehicle weight).I left the spare in place- (it is a road trip vehicle) and our roads are strewn with building debris-screws and roofing nails.I plug tires about 6 times per year on the two vehicles.

Yes,I bet there is some weight loss there.Maybe a CF hood-light weight battery-spare tire removal -maybe the passengers seat-carpet/padding. I would bet the wheels are pretty light already, so probably too expensive to find lighter ones.
Charlie

CR-Zmarty

Nobody hates your car,,, much less the CRZ over all. Just some of us wanted more. And if anybody could produce it. Honda could have. I hoped for and prayed for Honda to make this car the new/old ricer dream. I wanted the car to define a new class of hybrid. In the hands of mpg fans, great numbers while driving a skate that could go evil in a heart beat. I know you understand small evil with your Mini's.

I see nothing in CRZ that matchs Mini in CRZ as a drivers car. There is dynamite found in small cars. And I will share with you. I'm waiting to see if I can get my hands on a Fiat Abarth 500 SS. I was willing to give hybrid a shot with CRZ. Hell I could go buy a 200 mph Vette dirt cheap. Chevy dealers are such push overs. But I held out hope. If I wanted a hot rod hybrid boat. I could be happy with a Accord hybrid. And blow its epa numbers out of the water. 7th gen Accords coast for ever! :)

I will tell ya. I wanted a new updated R-18 hybrid crammed into a CRX class car. Big brake Honda kits, Sway bars that didn't look like bad spaghetti. IMA and a freaking battery pack worth talking about. A great 6MT! A dash so well thought out one never had to look at it to make anything work that has a control attached to it. A cock pit!!!!! A new Navi system truly worth the cost of admission, simple, plain and functional. And I wanted Honda's spot on work with it multi-link, on both ends. I wanted a car slotted in between Civic Coupe and Civic Si Coupe and cheap like a Fit/Insight in presentation. A car the defined a class, a idea.

I expected a benchmark. And I don't think we got it..................... We got a modern college boy marketing car fix it Honda. Not a market defining Honda. I now see ruts Honda has beat deep in there motorcycles.

I bought a Gen 1 Insight...heres why I did. Posted on "InsightCentral" a few weeks ago.

I was very set on purchasing a CR-Z about a month ago. I had done my research, I liked the look of the car and the techy feel to the interior. Then I test drove it....

I took a CR-Z for a 45 mile test drive on back roads and the highway. It rides very nice, almost to nice...soft. The rear end swayed around terrible, Im sure a sway bar would fix this. I just didnt feel like I was in a sporty car. Yes it looks sporty for sure, great lines in the body. When in econ mode, it was lifeless. I understand that econ is for fuel savings, but it went beyond saving to the point of almost dangerous as drivers behind me became quite agitated. So I quickly would go back to "normal" mode. The shifter was awesome, so smooth and predictable and the interior is top notch feeling and looking. But the largest issue I was dealing with was the poor mpg. I have reviewed Wayne's test drive of the CR-Z on CleanMPG and he achieved 65-70 mpg, but thats with the best of the best hypermiling. Most are achieving about 45-50mpg and really having to work at it.

So yesterday I decided I would go and test drive an '06 Insight and if it didnt "feel" like the right car for me I would go buy a CR-Z. Well the Insight was everything I wanted!!! It was a stiffer ride and understandably a lighter feel than the CR-Z. It actually handled very well. I had expected to be bouncing around a lot more with such a light car on poor Michigan roads. Road noise was very good at 75 mph and it was a windy day driving home. I didnt have any issue with keeping it straight on the highway, even with the worn out tires at 50PSI. It was comfortable and the interior was laid out plain...not to fancy, just the basics to give me the info I wanted, along with some nice creature comforts like power windows and cruise ( added of course). Biggest decision maker was the mpg I was achieving. I managed 60.1 mpg for 225 miles and I really wasnt paying much attention to the mpg gauge. I just drove it like most of my other cars, a little hypermiling here and there but not all the time. I never once felt like I needed more power or that I was agitating other drivers when I took off from a stop light, and I even passed another vehicle on a two lane road with ease!

So the Insight was a better decision for me. It does what I wanted, gets me from point A to point B with decent comfort, high mpg, and has a sporty feel to it. The CR-Z doesnt raise the bar for vehicles or hybrids, in my opinion.

Welcome to the Insight family! I notice you purchased the CVT version -- how do you like the transmission?

Welcome to the Insight family! I notice you purchased the CVT version -- how do you like the transmission?

I feel great to have the Insight. The trans has been great so far. I never feel it shift, from low to high. Still kinda bizarre to drive. I keep waiting for the up shift at 12-15mph, 25mph, 40mph, etc, like most cars. I am averaging 80mpg if I keep my speed around 45mph...incredible.:Banane01:

However, I would not write-off the CR-Z concept completely yet. And since this is CleanMPG and we still care more about MPG than fast acceleration times, we may have a bit more to say on the capabilities of these cars when driven for FE.

Wayne already showed what is possible when you put a true FE expert behind the wheel and very soon we'll be able to demonstrate what anyone can achieve with the MT6 and CVT models when these are driven defensibly and with the basic CMPG hypermiling toolkit under the belt. :D :D

Stay tuned for our week-long Head to Head review of two CR-Z's: One with a 6MT and the other with a CVT. A few surprises are likely in store. :D

I see that no one has been on this thread for quite awhile. What ever happened to the CR-Z MT6 vs CVT event! I own a CR-Z CVT and hear alot of good things about the MT6, so would be very interested in hearing about a first hand true comparison... Is there anyone out there who knows?... I can be patient! :rolleyes: