The New CRX (2011 CRZ) - Page 2 - Gas Savers

Somedude · 09-03-2010, 04:31 PM

It really doesn't surprise me that the CR-Z would be expensive to begin with, it is not a bad car imo but there are plenty of choices out there that do the job of saving gas way better and at a much lower cost. Take the Nissan Versa for example, or even the Toyota Yaris.

1993CivicVX · 09-20-2010, 04:57 PM

Hope no one mines me reviving this thread.

Does anyone else see a problem with comparing this to a car from 1986?

As far as your most fuel efficient sporty car comparo, you forgot the Mini Cooper S. 27/36mpg with what, 172hp? Plus, I'm pretty sure the Cooper S has back seats. Honda shoulda added 20hp to this thing. 8.8 seconds isn't exactly... sporty. Somehow it just can't be justified for a two seater.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Biffmeistro

Actually.....

At a comparable scale (Adjusted for the method of MPG calculation of 2008), the 1986 CRX Si (The most efficient Si CRX of all), got 26 city, 30 highway.

The manual CR-Z gets 31/37.

As far as performance goes, yes, the 91 CRX Si has a 0-60 of about 8.5 vs Edmunds test of 8.8 on the CR-Z, so it does have the miniscule advantage there, but the CRX Si could only pull .81g on the skidpad vs .83 for the CR-Z, with the CR-Z posting a 61.4mph slalom vs a 61.0 for the CRX.

So... Perfomance wise, these two cars are, near as makes no difference, Identical.

And yet the CR-Z gets better City MPG than the CRX did highway. Heck, even when you take the 1991 EPA ratings, the CR-Z still trashes it. Originally, the CRX Si was rated at 28/33.

So yes, the CR-Z IS a hyper efficient CRX Si. Meeting it in every performance category, and beating it in every FE category.

And when you think of it not as a hybrid, but as a performance car, it still is the most efficient performance car you can get, at all.

According to the EPA site, fort 2011 cars:
The current highest MPG "Sporty" car is the Audi A5 at 23/30.
The current highest MPG "Coupe" is the A5 quattro at 21/31
The current highest MPG "Hatchback" is the Aveo at 27/35

Heck, the only current non-hybrid gasoline cars that get better MPG are the new Fiesta and the Smart.

Yes, it is a hyper efficient sporty car. It is the most fuel efficient sporty car EVER made.

I do challenge you, find a sport oriented car that has ever had EPA mpg ratings higher than it, and you can even use the manual EPA ratings to make it easier. (Edit: It has to be in the USA, of course. No cheating by using nations with lax emissions regulations)

Edit: So far the closest thing I could find for a "sporty" type of car would be the Mini Cooper, and even that only is able to match the highway FE of the CR-Z, but not even touch the City MPG. 28/37

rgathright · 09-30-2010, 10:48 AM

I thought you might want to visually compare the Insight and CR-z as well.

2000 Honda Insight

2011 Honda CR-z

trollbait · 10-01-2010, 12:41 PM

I noticed how its back end was much like the Insight's when one was ahead of me.

Perhaps Honda should have made the CR-Z the new Insight. Maybe the Insight Si? And just done a hybrid Fit for the more practical hybrid.

i-DSi · 10-08-2010, 12:39 PM

I drove this CR-Z two weeks ago (prox. 500 miles !). Car I drove had the optional 17" rims with 205-tires.
But....480 of them were highwaymiles.
My impressions:
- It is very easy to have a low fuel consumption even if you don't care at all about fuel economy
- Torque at low revs is simply amazing!! Seems as good as a dieselengine. But this one keeps on revving if you want to. You almost never feel the need to downshift
- Very stable on the highway
- Suspension is way to stiff (probably optional rims/tires)
- Looks are great! And everybody looks at your car, a real eyecatcher.
- Comfort is poor, especially if you drove a coupe of hours.
- Fuel consumption on highway only is not good if you drive 130..140 km/h for a long time (just a bit more than 7 l/100km). But this is typical for all (hybrid)cars.

As I have a family with 3 kids I won't buy this car, but it's a good funcar with great looks and a very low, acceptable fuel consumption.

i-DSi · 10-08-2010, 03:55 PM

My boss bought this as a second car and I could drive it on a businesstrip.

101mpg · 10-11-2010, 06:44 PM

I just did a test drive and am surprised that I actually want one!

YES, it's heavy, but then again it will be a lot better in snow & rain due to the weight.

Amazing mileage. COMFORTABLE. Here's the issue on MPG - they test it in sport mode. The only thing sport mode does is downshift two gears. Normal is downshifted one gear, and econo mode is not downshifted.

Paddle shifters turn this thing into a manualmatic SEVEN speed. ACTUAL mileage is much above the quoted if you don't run it in sport mode all the time - in the 40s & 50s.

COMFORTABLE!!!!!!!! Can I emphasize this enough? I can see riding in this on very long trips. My wife & I often travel up to 14 hours and I would love to be driving in this car.

It really was a nice car. I also test drove the new 4-seater Insight and am impressed. A LOT more pickup and MUCH quieter than the first two versions of the Insight. Definite alternative to the Prius.

Battery warranty is 8 years, 100,000 miles. You can purchase a bumper-to-bumper warranty for 8 years and 120,000 miles for $1650. That is a LOT better than the standard 5 year warranty available for most. Can get this for EITHER vehicle.

2010 Insight comes with rear drums - why no one knows. These should be converted to disc. It's also got 4-lug wheels where the CR-Z has 5-lug. Only two things I was amazed that it didn't get right.

I wouldn't mind owning both of these vehicles. The salesman remarked that Honda should just drop a Civic engine into the CR-Z and see what happens.

pgfpro · 10-11-2010, 07:05 PM

This makes me feel a whole lot better about this car then. I might have to test drive one also. I wish someone on here would buy one so we could see what it really can do.

**theholycow** · 10-12-2010, 07:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 101mpg

2010 Insight comes with rear drums - why no one knows. These should be converted to disc. It's also got 4-lug wheels where the CR-Z has 5-lug. Only two things I was amazed that it didn't get right.

Drum brakes are fine. They're not as pretty and marketable as discs but Insight buyers won't notice. They have their advantages.

Would the 4 lug wheels mean that wheels from old Hondas fit, making them plentiful and cheap?

101mpg · 10-12-2010, 09:58 AM

The OFFICIAL numbers on this vehicle are 31/37.

The problem is they are done in SPORT mode, which basically don't go above 5th gear! In ECONO mode it's more like 51/56. If you want to go off the line REALLY fast ALL the time you'll be in sport mode and not wanting to buy this car.

In Normal mode you have 6th gear available, and in ECONO mode you have 6th & 7th gear available. All that SPORT mode does is downshift two gears. Normal mode downshifts 1 gear. And if you're wanting that sort of power, just leave it in econo and use the paddle shifters for your boost!

It's actually a good vehicle. I went in with a bad attitude based on the numbers and some of this thread. I actually love the vehicle and want to buy one. It's much more comfortable than the original CRX (which I love). I was honestly surprised.

It's not all-electric but Integrated Motor Assist. I wish there was an all-gas version, and who knows - maybe I might use a donor body and put a VX engine in it and see what happens. It's worth a second look!

**theholycow** · 10-12-2010, 10:14 AM

Any guesses why they did that?

How about the 6 speed manual? How are its ratings?
http://automobiles.honda.com/cr-z/fe...Feature=6speed

Fetch · 10-12-2010, 10:29 AM

It is my understanding that the automatic version has a CVT, not a 6- or 7-speed auto.

**theholycow** · 10-12-2010, 11:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fetch

It is my understanding that the automatic version has a CVT, not a 6- or 7-speed auto.

I had to go look at the web site to see what was up with "7th gear". The site says the CVT offers "more ratios". I guess it's not setup with the infinite variability capability of CVTs; like so many other CVTs on the market, it's programmed to act and feel like a transmission with a lot of gear choices.

trollbait · 10-12-2010, 12:38 PM

I don't think being in econ would change the test results. What I understand of the test protocol, the technician has to follow a map of accelerations, decelerations, and steady speeds. Being in econ just means the tester has to depress the pedal farther in order to stay within the test limits.

**theholycow** · 10-12-2010, 01:31 PM

If econ uses taller ratios that normal and sport don't use then it could certainly change the results.

As far as pressing the pedal is concerned, remember...it's drive by wire, so if they've programmed it efficiently then it's already opening the throttle wide anyway (like my VW does at low RPM).

i-DSi · 10-18-2010, 01:32 PM

Meanwhile I could drive a lot with the CR-Z last 2 weeks. But our European one is always the manual 6-speed.
Fuel consumption: varies between 5,2 and 7,5 l/100 km depending driving style. I tried all styles...
The sportsmode changes the reaction on the throttle. The reaction is indeed very different. In sportsmode there's also not SIL (shift indicator light).
Concerning official fuel consumption rating: this is done in Normal.
I already had a lot of fun with the car! But to be honest: I already would like a bit more punch (BHP) in such a good car.

i-DSi · 10-24-2010, 12:09 PM

Quote:

That kind of fuel consumption is pretty much inline with what one can get with a vanilla civic..

What is a vanilla Civic? I have a black Civic and an orange Civic for my wife. Same specs (5dr, 1.4 engine, Sport trim). But the color does not seem to influence the fuel consumption

.
My black one is more fuel efficient than the CR-Z. The orange one consumes much more than the black and the blue CR-Z. But that's my wife's driving habits and style.
On the other hand: a Civic does not drive like a CR-Z. It's more fun in a CR-Z (handling, the noise, the atmosphere...). The CR-Z is also more performant than the 2 1.4's with 83 BHP we have. But it is not as performant as the Civic 1.8 or 2.2 diesel we have here in Europe. The 1.8 consumes a bit more and the 2.2 diesel exhaust produces small particles that can be very harmfull.
I hope your vanilla Civic is not an old fashioned light weight 80' or begin 90's spec?

101mpg · 08-06-2011, 07:46 AM

The "CVT" actually functions only in 7 gears. If you use the paddle shifters, it doesn't really matter what you do, you end up with 7 gears. The CVT is much less of a CVT than advertised.

Here's a wonderful thing about the CRZ: Curb weight - 2,690 pounds. Curb weight of a 1984 CRX HF - 1,819 pounds. Curb weight of my wife's 2004 Malibu Maxx: 3,458. The CRZ will do better in the snow than my current vehicle.

When I get one of these (and I will), here are the advantages:

1) The car will shut the engine off when I'm at a stoplight, in the drive-thru at Taco Bell, which I have to admit is more than I want, etc.
2) Yes, apparently my electric razor & a bag of plastic Easter eggs had a baby - but it does look sporty. There's only so much one can do. But I DO want to bluetooth my phone with the stereo so I can have my custom playlists on long trips.
3) You can put a baby seat in the back - and with the 3 of us on trips - I do want that.
4) It's a GREAT one-person vehicle for driving back & forth to work. As a daily driver, it does so much of what I want.
5) The seats are like sitting in a custom made chair. I'm VERY tall, and comfort plays a big part in my life.
6) The fuel economy numbers are GREAT in econo mode - easy 50s. When I KEEP them there with city driving - THAT is the test.

The display looks like it was designed by an 18 year old looking to do drifting, but overall this car is a lot beefier than say a Smart, looks great, and will be a good fit for me. Yeah, I wish that we could remove some of the safety features, but I got hit by another driver recently in the minivan. I like driving my CRX around, but my wife is scared because OTHER drivers could hit us - and in that case my safe driving won't do much.

Has anyone else had the ability to test drive this vehicle lately?

Arky · 08-09-2011, 11:55 PM

I like this car, and my girlfriend really likes it. She might even buy one. Heck, you get a good looking car that's fun to drive and gets very good gas mileage. My only concern is there will be cars in similar or even lower price range with similar styling in the very near future that get better or much better fuel efficiency. Seems like to me the bar has already been raised to 40 mpg for cars of the future with 50 mpg in the not-so-distant future.

VetteOwner · 08-10-2011, 10:14 PM

they need to take more styling from the past to make a car look good IMO haha

i dont belive any car or truck past about 1990 (except for a VERY select few i can name on one hand) looks good to me, so bland with the same options and same basic colors...

1993CivicVX · 09-06-2011, 06:42 PM

So how do you hypermile this vehicle with the 6-speed MT? Does the engine shut off whenever you put it in neutral? That would be the pulse and glider's dream.

trollbait · 09-07-2011, 08:39 AM

I think the hybrid system is milder than what's in the new Insight and Civic. It doesn't shut off as often.

Arky · 09-08-2011, 11:42 AM

Girlfriend is really wanting one of these. There were two at our Honda dealership here back in April and she didn't even get out of the car to look at them. Now they're gone and there hasn't been another one on the lot and she is kicking herself. Anybody have an idea when the 2012s will make their way to the market?

trollbait · 09-11-2011, 08:43 AM

There was a recent recall on them. So it likely is delayed.

bowtieguy · 09-14-2011, 01:20 PM

saw one of these today...http://www.acura.com/ModelLanding.aspx?model=ZDX

not your geeky brother's hybrid!

**theholycow** · 09-14-2011, 02:02 PM

16/23mpg, 300hp, $46,000, 4410-4452 lbs. Don't know where you got the idea that it's hybrid, the link you provided doesn't indicate that, nor does its FE.

For comparison, the Camaro: 17/28mpg, 312hp, $23,800, 3780 lbs.

Probably a totally different class for different markets, but it came to mind when I read those specs. I'm sure the Acura is much more luxurious and probably a lot larger.

bowtieguy · 09-14-2011, 03:32 PM

maybe there are both hybrid and non-hybrid models. this link has "hybrid" in the title...http://www.kbb.com/car-360s-views/20...id-360s-views/

the one i saw reminded me of the crz...the rear of the vehicle. looking closer, it had a hybrid label on that beautiful rear!

Fetch · 09-14-2011, 07:37 PM

As far as I know, the ZDX is not available as a hybrid. The only labels I can see on the back are "A" for "Acura," "ZDX," and "SH-AWD." I think the drivetrain is identical to the MDX.

VetteOwner · 09-16-2011, 10:19 PM

barf... i dunno to me it still looks like an even uglier way overpriced honda to me...

gimmie the funny lookin camaro anyday haha

Arky · 09-27-2011, 12:20 AM

Girlfriend headed to the Show Me State on Saturday to look at a 2011 CR-Z. She's in a wheeling and dealing mood. Bet she brings it home. It's white and sharp and the dealer is wanting to unload it before the '12s arrive.