Quick Member Login:
Forgot password?
Forum Statistics:
Forum Members:
Total Threads:
Total Posts:

There are users
currently browsing forums.
  FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 03-12-2018, 04:47 AM
ElementW's Avatar
ElementW ElementW is offline
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Texas desert
Posts: 720
Default Honda CR-Z

One of Honda's recent misses imo. On one hand It was not a great sports car. Despite it's slick manual shifter and quick steering the CR-Z was too heavy for its size, sounded harsh and lacked the thrills that the snazzy looks promised. It wasn't appreciated as a hybrid either. With only two doors, two seats and tiny accommodations starting over $21k, everyone went for the more practical hybrids instead [Prius, Civic hybrid...etc].

It was a lost opportunity. Honda would not admit it that [at least from a marketing point] it wasn't working. Honda should have ditched the heavy hybrid system while plopping in the Civic Si's revvy engine. It would also have lowered the weight penalty.

It will have oddity value as time continues towards electrification.

Edit: Sorry if I got anyone excited that a new CR-Z was out, just thought I'd help in kickstarting the Legacy thread. ^ ^;

Last edited by ElementW; 03-12-2018 at 04:52 AM.
Reply With Quote
Old 03-12-2018, 08:42 AM
mick78 mick78 is online now
CSS Oldtimer
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Vienna, Austria
Posts: 8,864

Originally Posted by ElementW View Post

Edit: Sorry if I got anyone excited that a new CR-Z was out, just thought I'd help in kickstarting the Legacy thread. ^ ^;
I think it#'s a great start, and I fully agree, it was a lost opportunity; Too bad, because I think it did look stunning (well it still looks better than most Hondas IMO), and even the idea of making a modern day CRX a Hybrid was not a mistake as such, it was just the execution, that resulted in it being neither a good hybrid (in terms of economy, because, let's face it, that's by far the most important aspect in being a hybrid) nor a proper hot hatch rival, as simply being too slow. Also, at least in Europe, it was too expensive, ultimately competing with way more powerful/fun B-segment hot hatchbacks.

I think if they put right now the 1.5 turbo Civic engine in it, it would be an awesome car; No styling upgrade - aka uglyfication - required.
Reply With Quote
Old 03-13-2018, 01:26 AM
ElementW's Avatar
ElementW ElementW is offline
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Texas desert
Posts: 720

Even Honda's infamous ricers and tuners seem to ignore it. I wish some tuner out there would do a complete transplant.

And yes, it looks way more tasteful than any of the recent Honda's, I always loved it's clean purity, and it has been aging very well [pre-facelift mainly]. Can you imagine what Honda designers would have done if they went to a second gen CR-Z? Huge, fake vents everywhere, flared arches, black plastic inserts... oh no.
Reply With Quote
Old 03-13-2018, 03:49 AM
swizzle's Avatar
swizzle swizzle is offline
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Bakersfield
Posts: 25,454

A 2.0T and a good suspension would have saved the CRZ. Get rid of the ugly nose even more so. The CRZ was an epic lost opportunity for Honda. stunningly bad vision on their part. They could have had a GTI/Mini Cooper S competitor, but NOOOOO.
Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-2018, 01:14 PM
Levi Levi is offline
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 858

A common thing with Japanese latest sportscar to not have more powerful versions. If not for the lack of power, it was a good looking small and compact sporty car. There are not enough (good) small cars on the market, especially with so much going on in cities.
Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-2018, 02:55 PM
Crash Crash is offline
CSS Oldtimer
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 2,216

I thought this was a good looking product (for it's time)...the face hasn't aged well - unlike the 2nd gen CRX; which still looks sharp to this day. However, IMO, that's not what hurt this product
- It was a hybrid that delivered average fuel economy
- - People weren't mentally ready for the notion that 'hybrids' could be fun -and assumed (accurately) it'd be slow
- The hatch wasn't functional the way the CRX was.
- The performance was yawn inspiring. Even for the time it was launched -it was pretty average (there were faster cars on the road, offering better fuel economy that were cheaper).
-It also wasn't the easiest car to get in and out 6'2 - it was fine when I was in it, but wow it wasn't easy to get into.....
Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-2018, 08:25 PM
Allegro Allegro is offline
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 87

As for the front end, look at the CR-Z design and compare that to the current slate of Honda front ends. What are they thinking? What the heck is going on with the Civic and the Accord?
It looks simple in comparison.
This looks like a what I would expect a Honda to look like. Not like the current Civic. I laugh every time I see a new Civic because the rear end reminds me of the original Element commercials with the crab that says "I pinch!" Those taillights....they pinch!
Reply With Quote
Old 03-15-2018, 08:22 PM
ocn75 ocn75 is offline
CSS Oldtimer
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 2,186

The drivetrain and looks (not to everyone's tastes) held this back. Like others have said, a missed opportunity.
Reply With Quote

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:26 PM.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Black Falcon Media Group Oy