The New CRX (2011 CRZ)

[bowtieguy]

at first look, i'd like to have one, but FE in the 30s(hwy and city)? lame is an understatement! IT'S A HYBRID!!! 30ish mpg, give me a break!

http://cr-z.honda.com/?ef_id=1097:1:...20100729023227

[pgfpro]

Originally Posted by bowtieguy

at first look, i'd like to have one, but FE in the 30s(hwy and city)? lame is an understatement! IT'S A HYBRID!!! 30ish mpg, give me a break!

http://cr-z.honda.com/?ef_id=1097:1:...20100729023227

I'm not getting what Honda was trying to accomplish with this car? Its like it doesn't fit in either category Performance or FE-Hybrid? I like the body though.

[theholycow]

Originally Posted by pgfpro

I'm not getting what Honda was trying to accomplish with this car? {...} I like the body though.

You're getting the point just fine (even if that was sarcasm).

BTG, where are you getting that "30ish" MPG number? I didn't see it in the specifications at that link.

[GasSavers_BEEF]

http://cr-z.honda.com/specifications/

here are the specs for it

CR-Z [1]




- 1.5-liter SOHC i-VTEC 4-cylinder engine with Integrated Motor Assist (IMA)

- 122 horsepower (estimated) @ 6000 rpm (combined engine + IMA)

- 128 lb-ft. of torque (estimated) @ 1,000 – 1,500 rpm (123 lb-ft. for CVT), (combined engine + IMA)

- AT-PZEV CARB Emissions Rating

- EPA Estimated Fuel Economy, CVT (City/Highway/Combined): 35/39/37 miles per gallon [2]

- EPA Estimated Fuel Economy, MT (City/Highway/Combined): 31/37/34 miles per gallon [2]
- Overall Vehicle Length x Width x Height (in): 160.6 x 68.5 x 54.9 (including antenna)

- Wheelbase (in.): 95.8

- Weight (lbs., preliminary estimates): Approximately 2,670 (MT) to 2,725 (CVT)

- 3-Mode Drive System (Sport/Normal/ECON)

- Eco Assist™ System

- 6-Speed Manual Transmission (standard)

- Continuously Variable Transmission (CVT) with Paddle Shifter System (available)

- Advanced Compatibility Engineering™ (ACE™) Body Structure

- Vehicle Stability Assist™ (VSA?) with Traction Control

- Automatic Climate Control

- 16-inch Alloy Wheels

- Tilt and Telescopic Steering Column

- Security System with Remote Entry

- Cruise Control

- 160-Watt AM/FM/CD Audio System with MP3/windows with MP3/Windows Media? Audio (WMA) playback capability and 6 Speakers [3]

- MP3/Auxiliary Input Jack

- USB Audio Interface [4]

[Jim T.]

"snort!"
Traction assist with 122hp?
Why bother?

[Wyldesoul]

Originally Posted by Jim T.

"snort!"
Traction assist with 122hp?
Why bother?

Mostly because the stability control is legally required in all vehicles 2012 and later, and well... Traction control really is just a component of stability control.

[Wyldesoul]

I really don't understand why everyone is knocking it as a waste of a car. It is doing it's job very well, showing that not all hybrids are boring eco-focused cars.



The CR-Z is NOT the successor to the Mk 1 Insight, and it is NOT the successor to the CRX HF. Not at all. The insight was the successor to the CRX HF, and the Civic VX. The old insight was the no holds barred, maximum MPG out of a practical vehicle.

The CR-Z is much much more to be thought of as the successor to the CRX SI. It is a sporty vehicle first and foremost. Not a high performance, as even the CRX SI was pathetic in acceleration. No, it's a zippy car, a performance car that is also an efficient car.


But most importantly, it's a car that really helps defeat the idea that a hybrid is inherently boring, and open up the non-eco community to the possibilities of a hybrid for many other applications.

I see it more that the CR-Z is a challenge to other manufacturers.

"You've matched our eco-hyrids... Now show us your sport hybrids".

[IndyFetch]

I bought a Fit. Less money, only slightly worse mileage, less weight, and a lot more room. The CR-Z would be a better buy if it was $16K, 2400 lbs, and had the Civic DX/LX/EX engine in place of the hybrid powertrain. That powertrain is good for 36 mpg in the Civic. Sell an Si version with the Civic Si motor for $21K. Unfortunately, this will never happen.

[theholycow]

How did I read right past the EPA estimates?

Those numbers make it the most efficient non-hybrid gasoline powered vehicle on the market. I don't see why you guys are sneering.

I wonder why the CVT produces a better FE rating?

[Wyldesoul]

Originally Posted by theholycow

I wonder why the CVT produces a better FE rating?

Because with the CVT, the engine is able to accelerate while maintaining its perfect RPM for efficiency.

The engine is probably tuned to be most efficient at something like 2500rpm, and it's able to maintain 2500rpm throughout its entire acceleration process.

(That, and it doesn't have the energy wasting torque converter to deal with, which is the bane of all automatics)