The New CRX (2011 CRZ)

[theholycow]

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

[IndyFetch]

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

[theholycow]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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?

[VX_Arky]

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]

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...