Why? Which of your commuter needs does it fulfill? Seems a poor choice considering what's available.
more on the cr-z
- Thread starter Ethan
- Start date
- Replies 55
- Views 3K
We may earn a small commission from affiliate links and paid advertisements. Terms
they should have named it the CR-Y. because that is what i do everytime i look at this POS.
Without having seen it in person, much less having driven it, you like it. Despite it's horribly disappointing spec sheet, and mutilated body lines, you like it. Okay, let us know how that goes.
its a smallish 2 seater... which im all for... i say the smaller the better
but it gets mediocre gas mileage (33mpg) compared to what else is available, including new(er) cars available from other manufacturers, many of wich do not have the heavy and expensive to repair/replace hybrid system
no solid figures have been released yet on the weight yet... but all speculation seems to put it somewhere in the 2600-2800 range... and im sorry but if you are marketing this as a small lightweight sporty coupe, 2800lbs is pretty fucking bloated... what the hell happened to the 1900lb original (real) Insight??
it doesnt have enough performance to make it a sporty car... 0-60 is stated as 9.5 or 9.7 depending on sources... that makes it a full second slower than the Fit "sport" to 60... oooooh im all tingly... seriously if i want to drive a small underpowered car i can do so elsewhere for less money and often with better mileage
and another thing i noticed...according to this scan of the Japanese brochure: Temple of VTEC Rumors and News - Leaked: Official Japanese Brochure for CR-Z! ... from working the figures and scales in the drawing it seems that this thing is going to be sporting 18inch wheels... now if that scale is correct that means that there is going to be 36 inches of car hanging out AHEAD of the axle line.... 3 damn feet of car in front of the axle line!!!... come on Honda, i'd expect that shit from a mid 90s Chrysler Sebring not a 2011 Honda "sports coupe"... i guess we have forgotten that putting the wheels further out towards the corners makes the car handle a lot better??? aside from looking like hell, this car is going to corner like a damn ocean liner
Last edited:
Battle Pope
Well-Known Member
Honda's losing it. I will be seriously considering a Genesis Coupe (used) for my next purchase. Enough people are buying them as alternatives to the Mustang that they should have more than a few on the used market in a few years.
92stoccord
Big Member
Was hoping this would make possible for the interbreeding of a B/D/F block 6spd. They should get on that.
Battle Pope
Well-Known Member
I'd rather they "get on" making good cars again.
I don't like all this hate on the cr-z
I'd try to defend it as much as I could, but I'd risk my job... For one though, the car is MUCH better looking in person than in pictures. I was disappointed when I first saw styling images, however it looks awesome in person. There are maybe one or two unflattering angles. Second, everyone seems to think that the goal of this car is to replace the s2000. It's a "sporty hybrid", and it will do a damn good job of that. People like to bitch about how the thing weighs 2600-2800lb. Considering the state of the auto market, it's one of the lightest cars on the road. Take out the IMA and battery pack, and now things look better. So yea, the crx and 1st gen insight were light as hell. Ever see the safety ratings on either? Makes me think twice about ever owning one.
I'd try to defend it as much as I could, but I'd risk my job... For one though, the car is MUCH better looking in person than in pictures. I was disappointed when I first saw styling images, however it looks awesome in person. There are maybe one or two unflattering angles. Second, everyone seems to think that the goal of this car is to replace the s2000. It's a "sporty hybrid", and it will do a damn good job of that. People like to bitch about how the thing weighs 2600-2800lb. Considering the state of the auto market, it's one of the lightest cars on the road. Take out the IMA and battery pack, and now things look better. So yea, the crx and 1st gen insight were light as hell. Ever see the safety ratings on either? Makes me think twice about ever owning one.
95b16coupe
Well-Known Member
you have to remember, some of these guys hate on Megan Fox because she has weird fingers, and they haven't gotten laid in forever. same with the cr-z haters. they haven't driven a car that cost over $5000 or is newer than 2000.I don't like all this hate on the cr-z
most credibility goes out the window on a forum. on anything; girls, cars, stocks, food, hotels. anything.
Battle Pope
Well-Known Member
I'm just bitter because I wish I could tell my past self not to fuck up my '95 coupe. I'd still have it if I'd done that car right. Best car I've ever owned, present vehicle included.
92stoccord
Big Member
I don't hate it because its underpowered or heavy, and seeing pics of it, it does seem like they just got really crappy angles. I wish they would have come up with something a little more original than the Insight rear end. I'm dissapointed that its my 92 accord with 3 less seats, a hybrid engine, air bags and brand new. That's it. I really expected an econobox. A sexah econobox, better mileage. I wouldn't have minded if they gave us 90hp and 60 mpgs. Just sort of a let down, and like everyone says, carrot, on stick. Sure, if I had the choice, I'd probably chose that over anything in its class. Why? Brand loyalty, mostly. Nothing else really puts it out there for me.
95b16coupe
Well-Known Member
you guys need to remember, this car isnt' made for enthusiasts. it's made for commuters and hippies. in an ideal world, my ideal car would have 350hp and get 60mpg.
but i can't have that, so i sacrifice mpg for hp. i'm 100% positive this thing gets better than the EPA rated 32 mpg or whatever it is.
but i can't have that, so i sacrifice mpg for hp. i'm 100% positive this thing gets better than the EPA rated 32 mpg or whatever it is.
the 1st gen Insight received the same 4 star frontal crash safety rating as both the Civic and Accord from 2000... whats the problem???
side impact was not tested for the 2000 Insight... but im sure seeing that it lacked side curtain airbags it would have likely scored a similarly to the 2 or 3 star rating that the 2000 Civics received
Believe me I was PISSED when I found out what was under the hood. It will be a fun little econobox though. It's basically a Fit with low end torque. 0-60 i'm guessing a half second better than what a fit can do. It has nice wheels, a nice interior with cool features, HID's, disks all around, ect...
Real world mileage will be much better than the epa rating too. It, like the Insight, has Econo mode, which make the accelerator pedal much mushier, and on cvt cars, it will go strait to high gear - basically forces you to save gas, at the expense of it feeling like a turd. The EPA testing is done in regular mode.
Real world mileage will be much better than the epa rating too. It, like the Insight, has Econo mode, which make the accelerator pedal much mushier, and on cvt cars, it will go strait to high gear - basically forces you to save gas, at the expense of it feeling like a turd. The EPA testing is done in regular mode.
Basically every car Honda offers now is 4 or 5 star in every category. The hard one is the side impact. If you cut through the A, B, and C pillars of older cars, they are only 1 maybe 2 sheet of sheet metal. Nowadays cars are sporting 3 layers of thick steel. You are much safer now.. it just kills the car's weight.
im not hating on the cr-z
it just doesnt seem like honda's best effort
their best effort on re-creating the crx should have incorporated things about the original crx. small, light and efficient with decent looks as well
this car doesnt even get the gas mileage of an 88-91 hf or si, and for sure isnt as light. it might be as small, but still
if youre going to re-create a car at least make it somewhat like the original. honda did it without hybrid before, why cant they do it again?
it just doesnt seem like honda's best effort
their best effort on re-creating the crx should have incorporated things about the original crx. small, light and efficient with decent looks as well
this car doesnt even get the gas mileage of an 88-91 hf or si, and for sure isnt as light. it might be as small, but still
if youre going to re-create a car at least make it somewhat like the original. honda did it without hybrid before, why cant they do it again?
Honda is building what they think people with money will buy. If I had 30k to blow I wouldn't get anything Honda makes. Guess what? Me, along with most "enthusiasts" that bitch about the CR-Z can't afford a new car. I'd prolly end up with a 370z or WRX. Those kinds of cars have low profit margins. In this shit economy, there isn't budget for that.
Now what Honda is doing is turning people away by generating less interest in the brand. People go to the dealership to check out a mustang or a corvette, and end up buying some econobox.
Now what Honda is doing is turning people away by generating less interest in the brand. People go to the dealership to check out a mustang or a corvette, and end up buying some econobox.
I guess that's the thing. I care more about all the benefits of being lightweight than I do govt. safety ratings. Better speed, better handling, better braking, better fuel economy, cheaper to build. All those great qualities are thrown right out the window for an extra star in the safety column of their brochure.
What's the probability of that extra weight saving your life? Slim to fucking none. The probabilities of those 2 extra layers of steel actually making a difference IF you get into an accident, and IF it's with a larger vehicle at high speeds, and IF it's a side impact are pretty astronomical. It seems we are all paying a pretty high price for a very slim probability.
Oh well, in America fear trumps common sense.
What's the probability of that extra weight saving your life? Slim to fucking none. The probabilities of those 2 extra layers of steel actually making a difference IF you get into an accident, and IF it's with a larger vehicle at high speeds, and IF it's a side impact are pretty astronomical. It seems we are all paying a pretty high price for a very slim probability.
Oh well, in America fear trumps common sense.
