Honda: CR-Z News **Facelift Revealed (page 31)**
12-09-2009, 08:59 AM
#242
Senior Moderator
I hope King77 from TOV doesn't mind that I stole his post but it had some good info.
To me it looks like this will be very competitive in the European market. But besides the Mini, those cars don't exist here and there's a reason for that. Maybe the NA version will be getting an alternate gas engine?
There will be practically no competition for CR-Z in US (instead of Mini), but here in Europe this car must fight with Suzuki Swift Sport, Renault Twingo RS, Citroen C2 VTS. According to known figures, CR-Z loses:
Swift: 1.6/125hp@6800/148Nm@4800/0-100@8,9 s(!), weight 1090 kg
Twingo RS: 1.6/133hp@6750/166NM@4400/0-100@8,7(!), weight 1050 kg
Mini: 1.6/120hp@6000/160Nm@4650/0-100@9,1 s, weight 1140 kg
C2 VTS: 1.6/125hp@6500/143@3750/0-100@8,9 s, weight ca 1100
CR-Z: 1.5/114hp@6000/145Nm@4800/0-100@9,7 s, weight ???
As you can see, CR-Z is approx. 1 s slower in 0-100 than the competition, although Swift has similar performance figures. So, when CR-Z has 78 Nm extra torque and 13 extra hp in IMA, where are they? Of course 0-100 doesn´t say everything about real life performance, but it is strange to have such a bad result. This doesn´t look CR-Z wil be so light like Honda promised. How much money will Honda want for such a tyre-burner? Well these are sporty oriented cars, but what´s unsuprising, CR-Z figures are similar to non-sporty versions of mainstream cars:
Ford Fiesta 1.6/120hp@6000/152 Nm@4050/0-100@9,9 s
Hyundai i20!!! 1.6/126hp@6300/157Nm@4200/0-100@9,5 s
These cars are here cheaper than Jazz 1.4! (And in the list are not downsized turbo engines (1.4T in most cases).
Yeah, power is not everything, definitelly, but are here REALLY some guys, which thinks CR-Z IS NOT UNDERPOWERED? And this car probably will have the worst power-to-money ratio in Europe.
Swift: 1.6/125hp@6800/148Nm@4800/0-100@8,9 s(!), weight 1090 kg
Twingo RS: 1.6/133hp@6750/166NM@4400/0-100@8,7(!), weight 1050 kg
Mini: 1.6/120hp@6000/160Nm@4650/0-100@9,1 s, weight 1140 kg
C2 VTS: 1.6/125hp@6500/143@3750/0-100@8,9 s, weight ca 1100
CR-Z: 1.5/114hp@6000/145Nm@4800/0-100@9,7 s, weight ???
As you can see, CR-Z is approx. 1 s slower in 0-100 than the competition, although Swift has similar performance figures. So, when CR-Z has 78 Nm extra torque and 13 extra hp in IMA, where are they? Of course 0-100 doesn´t say everything about real life performance, but it is strange to have such a bad result. This doesn´t look CR-Z wil be so light like Honda promised. How much money will Honda want for such a tyre-burner? Well these are sporty oriented cars, but what´s unsuprising, CR-Z figures are similar to non-sporty versions of mainstream cars:
Ford Fiesta 1.6/120hp@6000/152 Nm@4050/0-100@9,9 s
Hyundai i20!!! 1.6/126hp@6300/157Nm@4200/0-100@9,5 s
These cars are here cheaper than Jazz 1.4! (And in the list are not downsized turbo engines (1.4T in most cases).
Yeah, power is not everything, definitelly, but are here REALLY some guys, which thinks CR-Z IS NOT UNDERPOWERED? And this car probably will have the worst power-to-money ratio in Europe.
12-09-2009, 11:20 AM
#243
The sizzle in the Steak
12-09-2009, 11:46 AM
#244
Alright, so I'm going to get off the pile and wait until this thing comes out.
The Hondaphile in me is thinking that the CRZ doesn't compete with anything here in the US because, as Dom alluded to, there isn't really anything like it here. However, it seems that market will be gaining more importance again here in NA.
Also, if 9.7 is a manufacturer supplied number, we all know how those go. They are hit or miss for real world. Suffice it to say that it'll be 'slow', but given its size and if given typical honda (of the 90s) characteristics of overall lightness of being, it might be pretty decent at darting in and out of big city traffic. IMA might be a good thing here.
One thing I do think isn't in question is that it looks good. Honda US needs to make sure it supplies it with decent interior materials to keep up the image. It might be a car for those eco-enthusiasts that want their economy but don't want to feel cheap in doing so.
Lastly, its success will hinge upon how much it sells for and how the mileage figures stack up. Fun-to-drive isn't as important to the masses as Honda reliability, the gas mileage, and the eco-image.
The Hondaphile in me is thinking that the CRZ doesn't compete with anything here in the US because, as Dom alluded to, there isn't really anything like it here. However, it seems that market will be gaining more importance again here in NA.
Also, if 9.7 is a manufacturer supplied number, we all know how those go. They are hit or miss for real world. Suffice it to say that it'll be 'slow', but given its size and if given typical honda (of the 90s) characteristics of overall lightness of being, it might be pretty decent at darting in and out of big city traffic. IMA might be a good thing here.
One thing I do think isn't in question is that it looks good. Honda US needs to make sure it supplies it with decent interior materials to keep up the image. It might be a car for those eco-enthusiasts that want their economy but don't want to feel cheap in doing so.
Lastly, its success will hinge upon how much it sells for and how the mileage figures stack up. Fun-to-drive isn't as important to the masses as Honda reliability, the gas mileage, and the eco-image.
12-09-2009, 12:47 PM
#245
Instructor
Yeah, I agree this doesn’t look all that bad. Definitely will be a strong contender in Asian and European markets but probably won’t sell well here in the US despite similar performance to the Mini. I don’t think Honda will introduce it here in US as is. There’s got to some kind of engine change with this for the US. Hybrid drivers are into practicality, and this is NOT practicality…
12-09-2009, 01:26 PM
#246
Cars like ZDX, CrossTour** and probably CR-Z were already at the stage where the machining, tools and body panel dies were already made. You've heard the (very) old expression "the die is cast"? That is what it means.
In the case of the CR-Z: 1) The plans were in place before the Insight went on sale. 2) They're holding back something for a future Si version or a future Acura spin-off. After all, if you have a new version of IMA, should you debut in the Honda side or as a showcase for hybrid Acuras?
**I'm assuming as I have no direct information on the Honda side
12-09-2009, 05:03 PM
#247
Senior Moderator
Mugen Version Leaked...
From Autoblog...
http://www.autoblog.com/2009/12/09/a...cr-z-by-mugen/
With yesterday's leaked brochure of the production version of the 2011 Honda CR-Z, a Temple of VTEC member wasted no time uploading what could be the first Mugen variant of Honda's new hybrid hatch.
Details on the mods are minimal, but the tuner appears to be working on a dress-up package that includes a new front bumper/splitter, side skirts, rear bumper and wing. Naturally, a new set of wheels are part of the package -- what appears to be a set of 17-inch, seven spoke hoops, likely shod in stickier rubber.
Given Mugen's strong ties to Honda, expect the full kit to be available through dealers in Japan when the CR-Z goes on sale early next year.
Details on the mods are minimal, but the tuner appears to be working on a dress-up package that includes a new front bumper/splitter, side skirts, rear bumper and wing. Naturally, a new set of wheels are part of the package -- what appears to be a set of 17-inch, seven spoke hoops, likely shod in stickier rubber.
Given Mugen's strong ties to Honda, expect the full kit to be available through dealers in Japan when the CR-Z goes on sale early next year.
12-09-2009, 05:04 PM
#248
Senior Moderator
12-09-2009, 05:05 PM
#249
Senior Moderator
Okay, I must say, I quite like it. Sure, it may be slow...but, dayum...not bad!
12-09-2009, 05:19 PM
#250
The sizzle in the Steak
Having a hampster in a wheel for an engine just kills anything that could have been great about this car.
12-09-2009, 05:21 PM
#251
Senior Moderator
Dang that looks good.
12-09-2009, 05:22 PM
#252
Senior Moderator
On looks alone...maybe this little car has a chance. I'm not a fan of the lack of power...but, hey. It just may sell. It's a Honda (so, the rep) and it looks really good.
Just hope the price point works. Maybe Honda has a potential winner?
Just hope the price point works. Maybe Honda has a potential winner?
12-09-2009, 05:37 PM
#253
The Mugen version looks hot. Not sure about the wing though, though that's how I feel about most Mugen wings.
I have no idea how this car will sell, but to me, I think it'll be fun to drive. Yes, I love a big torquey V8 with the exhaust note to match, but I can appreciate a small car you can toss around. It's just that when I give up practicality (by that I mean doors and/or passenger seats) I'm expecting some nice power or all-around performance to make up for it, of which it looks like this car has neither.
BUT, it is probably going to be cheap as heck.... so I guess this is the car for those looking for a gas-miser daily driver, but don't want to look like a squarebear tree hugging green thumb, so they go for this "sportier" car, which will offer more driving excitement than the Prius/Insight, at least. And usually they won't need the extra passenger seats since they go alone on their commute.
I have no idea how this car will sell, but to me, I think it'll be fun to drive. Yes, I love a big torquey V8 with the exhaust note to match, but I can appreciate a small car you can toss around. It's just that when I give up practicality (by that I mean doors and/or passenger seats) I'm expecting some nice power or all-around performance to make up for it, of which it looks like this car has neither.
BUT, it is probably going to be cheap as heck.... so
I guess this is the car for those looking for a gas-miser daily driver, but don't want to look like a squarebear tree hugging green thumb, so they go for this "sportier" car, which will offer more driving excitement than the Prius/Insight, at least. And usually they won't need the extra passenger seats since they go alone on their commute.
12-09-2009, 06:08 PM
#254
12-09-2009, 06:24 PM
#256
The sizzle in the Steak
I've explained this so many times I've lost count. The NSX was past prototype stage but not past the production line stage. RWD wasn't even at the prototype stage. This is one difference. Another is that (although debated here by some) the ZDX is going to be a profitable project, the NSX never was (I don't think this assertion has been challenged). The NSX was supposed to be a showcase for Acura tech, but if the direction of the company is changing, why cast a halo in one direction but go in another?
Cars like ZDX, CrossTour** and probably CR-Z were already at the stage where the machining, tools and body panel dies were already made. You've heard the (very) old expression "the die is cast"? That is what it means.
In the case of the CR-Z: 1) The plans were in place before the Insight went on sale. 2) They're holding back something for a future Si version or a future Acura spin-off. After all, if you have a new version of IMA, should you debut in the Honda side or as a showcase for hybrid Acuras?
**I'm assuming as I have no direct information on the Honda side
Cars like ZDX, CrossTour** and probably CR-Z were already at the stage where the machining, tools and body panel dies were already made. You've heard the (very) old expression "the die is cast"? That is what it means.
In the case of the CR-Z: 1) The plans were in place before the Insight went on sale. 2) They're holding back something for a future Si version or a future Acura spin-off. After all, if you have a new version of IMA, should you debut in the Honda side or as a showcase for hybrid Acuras?
**I'm assuming as I have no direct information on the Honda side
2007-2010
Timeline for NSX (from teh wikipedia)
In December 2007, American Honda CEO, Tetsuo Iwamura, confirmed a new NSX powered by a V10 engine would make its introduction to the market by 2010.[11] The new sports car would be based on the Acura ASCC (Advanced Sports Car Concept) introduced at the 2007 North American International Auto Show.[12] With Honda CEO Takeo Fukui challenging the developers to make the vehicle faster than its rivals,[13] prototypes of the vehicle were seen testing on the Nürburgring in June 2008.[14] On December 17, 2008, Fukui announced during a speech about Honda's revised financial forecast that, due to poor economic conditions, all plans for a next-generation NSX had been cancelled.
hmmmmm....same timeline....and yet they still managed to kill the NSX....odd.
12-09-2009, 06:45 PM
#258
12-09-2009, 06:51 PM
#259
Could it even be remotely possible that it takes much longer to develop an all new chassis to compete at $120,000 than a coupe off an existing chassis? The NSX was not going to be profitable in it's own right, it's benefit to the company was to showcase Acura technology. So with the brand moving in a different direction, this became a showcase for the wrong technology.
12-09-2009, 08:10 PM
#260
Senior Moderator
I understand the need to exaggerate when trying to find something to support your defence of the CR-Z, no worries.
12-09-2009, 08:26 PM
#261
12-09-2009, 08:54 PM
#263
I keep saying the same things in response to the same criticisms over and over again. This leads me to believe:
A) Some people are not understanding the point
(this despite my rephrasing it several times,maybe they're just stupid?)
B) Some people are not believing what I've written
(I try to be clear if what I write is an opinion, fact or something from a source I cannot quote. Regardless, I do my best to be a good 'netizen' and be respectful of others)
C) Some people are deliberately being antagonistic.
(yeah, you think?)
I do expect that common courtesy should apply (this is where you tell me 'it's the internet' so don't expect too much), but I think you're wrong. We need to expect more of ourselves, we should try to improve the quality of what we write, even in disagreement. So when you call me for exaggerating once, it is irritating beyond belief. Because if anybody tries to 'keep it real' I think I qualify.
(feel free to disagree: you may select A, B or C above)
A) Some people are not understanding the point
(this despite my rephrasing it several times,maybe they're just stupid?)
B) Some people are not believing what I've written
(I try to be clear if what I write is an opinion, fact or something from a source I cannot quote. Regardless, I do my best to be a good 'netizen' and be respectful of others)
C) Some people are deliberately being antagonistic.
(yeah, you think?)
I do expect that common courtesy should apply (this is where you tell me 'it's the internet' so don't expect too much), but I think you're wrong. We need to expect more of ourselves, we should try to improve the quality of what we write, even in disagreement. So when you call me for exaggerating once, it is irritating beyond belief. Because if anybody tries to 'keep it real' I think I qualify.
(feel free to disagree: you may select A, B or C above)
12-09-2009, 09:14 PM
#264
Senior Moderator
^ 
Sorry, Colin...but, to some degree, I can understand your frustration. I get this from time-to-time in other threads (i.e. sports discussions). All I can offer you is to try your best to keep a sense a humor...And yeah, it's the Internet. I know, it's a cop-out answer.
But, keep it up. You're absolutely entitled to your opinion and what you say is valid even if some refuse to agree or even see your PoV.
Sorry, Colin...but, to some degree, I can understand your frustration. I get this from time-to-time in other threads (i.e. sports discussions). All I can offer you is to try your best to keep a sense a humor...And yeah, it's the Internet. I know, it's a cop-out answer.
But, keep it up. You're absolutely entitled to your opinion and what you say is valid even if some refuse to agree or even see your PoV.
12-09-2009, 09:56 PM
#265
lol, screw that.... if I think someone is an idiot I'll say it and I have on this forum. Usually I just hint at it to not be so offensive, but if they don't get it, then they really are one 
12-10-2009, 10:32 AM
#274
Senior Moderator
I keep saying the same things in response to the same criticisms over and over again. This leads me to believe:
A) Some people are not understanding the point
(this despite my rephrasing it several times,maybe they're just stupid?)
B) Some people are not believing what I've written
(I try to be clear if what I write is an opinion, fact or something from a source I cannot quote. Regardless, I do my best to be a good 'netizen' and be respectful of others)
C) Some people are deliberately being antagonistic.
(yeah, you think?)
I do expect that common courtesy should apply (this is where you tell me 'it's the internet' so don't expect too much), but I think you're wrong. We need to expect more of ourselves, we should try to improve the quality of what we write, even in disagreement. So when you call me for exaggerating once, it is irritating beyond belief. Because if anybody tries to 'keep it real' I think I qualify. (feel free to disagree: you may select A, B or C above)
A) Some people are not understanding the point
(this despite my rephrasing it several times,maybe they're just stupid?)
B) Some people are not believing what I've written
(I try to be clear if what I write is an opinion, fact or something from a source I cannot quote. Regardless, I do my best to be a good 'netizen' and be respectful of others)
C) Some people are deliberately being antagonistic.
(yeah, you think?)
I do expect that common courtesy should apply (this is where you tell me 'it's the internet' so don't expect too much), but I think you're wrong. We need to expect more of ourselves, we should try to improve the quality of what we write, even in disagreement. So when you call me for exaggerating once, it is irritating beyond belief. Because if anybody tries to 'keep it real' I think I qualify.
(feel free to disagree: you may select A, B or C above)But in that instance you did clearly exaggerate to prove your point. Sorry, but you did.
Not once in this thread can I recall expectations of grandeur as far CR-Z performance goes. Prove me wrong. As far as I'm concerned, its a mixture of A, B and C. IMO you go too far out of your way to defend every nut, bolt and word that comes out of Honda. Just my
I'm sure you think I'm the exact opposite of me which is probably true these days. I think what you're missing and can't quite grasp is that just because you can explain and provide reason's for decision's Honda makes, that doesn't validate and make those decisions the right one's. It still leaves them open to criticism and debate. Regardless of the reason's and how right you are about them. Just because "I've explained this so many times I've lost count" that doesn't suddenly take Honda off the hook. The criticism is aimed at Honda, not you.
I think we've had these debates long enough that you know I respect you and your opinion. Just don't expect everyone to always agree with it. And yes, I've been deliberately antagonistic with you at times. Sometimes I just can't help it.
Sorry. And for the record I agree with your point about the NSX vs CR-Z cancellation. Two entirely different cars. And although the CR-Z is a slug I can understand why its making production, although I can't understand why its a 2 seater. Which IMO is a bigger mistake than its power ratings.
Last edited by dom; 12-10-2009 at 10:38 AM.
12-10-2009, 12:07 PM
#275
Burning Brakes
My issue with this car is that they're marketing it as a hybrid that performs like a sports/sporty car, but at least on paper, it doesn't suggest that at all. No one here was expecting it to perform like an S2000 or even a Civic Si.
I was expecting it to be in the range of 150-180 HP with the low end grunt of an electric motor. Maybe part of the reason is because this version is intended for the EU market which is more suited for these low-powered, fuel efficient cars, but I don't see how it could possibly pass off as a sports car when it has just as much power as a Mini Cooper but more weight.
12-10-2009, 12:27 PM
#276
The sizzle in the Steak
Could it even be remotely possible that it takes much longer to develop an all new chassis to compete at $120,000 than a coupe off an existing chassis? The NSX was not going to be profitable in it's own right, it's benefit to the company was to showcase Acura technology. So with the brand moving in a different direction, this became a showcase for the wrong technology.
But the whole idea that the timeline would not work to cancel the CRZ does not make sense.
Look at the timeline for the LFA...all new chassis..etc and so on:
The Lexus LFA debuted in 2007...hits the streets in 2010....same timeline as the NSX was supposed to have as well.
Judging by the timelines there is no reason why the CRZ could not have been cancelled....I just don't see it.
12-10-2009, 01:00 PM
#277
If they had, I think they've pulled back from any assertion that it's a 'sports car' and seem to be focusing on 'sporty' or 'fun to drive' instead. Also, it's worth remembering that the US version (and marketing to go with it) hasn't been announced yet. I hope that if they're bringing the JDM car as shown, that the marketing support had the right message.
Not a guess on my part, I"ve spoken to those who know.
12-10-2009, 01:16 PM
#278
So I'm not defending it, I'm just suggesting why it's not going to happen immediately. And even that is ok because I'm pleased to offer a 'factory' point of view. The thing that gets tired, is the same guy will say the same thing over and over again. It just seems so immature.
I can't understand why its a 2 seater. Which IMO is a bigger mistake than its power ratings.
12-10-2009, 04:10 PM
#279
The sizzle in the Steak
I don't buy it. The timelines don't add up.
Sounds like an excuse by those "in the know".
Either that or Honda works at a snails pace compared to the entire industry.
...but that can't be true because their track record speaks otherwise.
Sounds like an excuse by those "in the know".
Either that or Honda works at a snails pace compared to the entire industry.
...but that can't be true because their track record speaks otherwise.
12-10-2009, 04:36 PM
#280
It probably would have been a harder decision had the line been made. I can only speculate on what would have been done had that happened.
But, as you said, 'you don't buy it'. So why do you think they dropped the NSX? Just to piss off everybody?