Topic: 2011 Honda CR-Z; Day 1

[TopGun]

Buddy of mine just bought a 1987 CRX with 13,000 km on it...$6,000.   

SI?

Si?  No!   

Nope...not an Si.  Found it in Rockton.  He owns the same car (silver...new one is red) with ~ 400,000 some km on it.

I'm not sure I'd pay $6,000 for it.  Heck, weren't they $14,000 new?  Ya...it's in perfect shape, but my guess is that it will need a lot of work when he starts to actually drive it.

I should go take some shots of it.

[rrocket]

Buddy of mine just bought a 1987 CRX with 13,000 km on it...$6,000.   

SI?

Si?  No!   

Nope...not an Si.  Found it in Rockton.  He owns the same car (silver...new one is red) with ~ 400,000 some km on it.

I'm not sure I'd pay $6,000 for it.  Heck, weren't they $14,000 new?  Ya...it's in perfect shape, but my guess is that it will need a lot of work when he starts to actually drive it.

I should go take some shots of it.

MAYBE if it was an Si.....But otherwise?  Way too much, IMO...

[Sir Osis of Liver]

Well said.  I've been waiting for years for a replacement for my beloved CRX Si (a car which I still have, btw) and this ain't it!  The specs don't lie.  Honda you have yet to win me back!

.....and Honda hasn't marketed this as a replacement for the CRX, nor have I read Honda calling this a CRX successor.  Seems only CRX owners lovers are the one's saying this.

Yeah, I don't know where people got the idea it was a successor to the CRX.

 CRY, CR-Y, CR-Z! Yeah! That's the ticket!

[Snowdog]

.....and Honda hasn't marketed this as a replacement for the CRX, nor have I read Honda calling this a CRX successor.  Seems only CRX owners lovers are the one's saying this.

Really? I was sure I saw Honda brining up the CRX lineage. I just went to honda.com clicked CR-Z and under Heritage the first thing that comes up is the CRX:
http://automobiles.honda.com/cr-z/heritage.aspx
"The CR-Z continues a long tradition of sporty two-seat coupes in America. In 1984 Honda introduced the Civic CRX... "

That sounds to me like they are saying the CR-Z is the successor to the CRX.

[rrocket]

.....and Honda hasn't marketed this as a replacement for the CRX, nor have I read Honda calling this a CRX successor.  Seems only CRX owners lovers are the one's saying this.

Really? I was sure I saw Honda brining up the CRX lineage. I just went to honda.com clicked CR-Z and under Heritage the first thing that comes up is the CRX:
http://automobiles.honda.com/cr-z/heritage.aspx
"The CR-Z continues a long tradition of sporty two-seat coupes in America. In 1984 Honda introduced the Civic CRX... "

That sounds to me like they are saying the CR-Z is the successor to the CRX.

It doesn't sound that way to me.  Just sounds like they're trying to do what they've done in the past...build a sporty 2 seater.  They also have the Del Sol in the heritage too....do you think this is the successor to the Del Sol based on that?

[Snowdog]

So it isn't a successor, it is just based on the past.

Well if Honda own page was too amiguous, how are the dealers marketing it:

http://www.bayridgehonda.com/2011crz.aspx
Honda CRX Heritage

The exterior design of CR-Z deliberately evokes the iconic style of the 1980s and 1990s Honda CRX, which was originally developed to provide a small, stylish car that could achieve excellent fuel economy. Signature features of the CRX, like the split-level rear glass hatch of the second generation model and the low, shallow raked roofline have been referenced in the design of the sleek coupe and then combined with a curvaceous and deeply sculpted exterior form.

To pretend they aren't banking on and marketing with CRX heritage at this point seems disingenuous.

[rrocket]

So it isn't a successor, it is just based on the past.

Well if Honda own page was too amiguous, how are the dealers marketing it:

It is a bit yea.  But they also say "the del Sol continued where the CRX left off".  ANd I don't know of anybody that thinks the Del Sol was a successor to the CRX....or the Insight.  They likely would have put the NSX in there too if it was marketed as a Honda in the US (as it is in Japan)

Oh...and that dealer is a dumb a$$.....

[Ex-airbalancer]

The last year CRX was produced was 1991
So most people who ever drove a new are over 35
Marketing people say anything but the truth

[roscoe]

There is going to be a lot of criticism of the CR-Z  on the basis it is not a rubber burner.  But it is probably about as sporty as cars are going to be once new fuel efficiency standards are enacted.  And certainly enough for most people now.

It is going to get a lot of criticism because it is an incredibly poor execution of a weak idea...

...Instead neither CRZ is good at anything, it is designed by committee mediocrity defined. 

Agreed. If Honda really wanted to evoke the spirit of the CRX, they could have just as easily kept the design but ditched the hybrid aspect. That would have bumped up performance nicely, improved the handling, and still would have achieved very respectable fuel economy. Oh, and it would have shed a couple hundred lbs in the process.

I think this is a case of an automaker building something because they can, not because they should. There are better ways to showcase your hybrid technology, much better ways to execute on a sporty design, and still even smarter ways to meet government standards. The CRZ is a mashup of all three.

[67 Piston Slap]

One option I did miss is the integrated middle arm-rest, which is available on the $1,195 essentials package, although it seems pricey for an armrest, rubber mats and an auto-dimming rearview mirror.

No. Wait.

You have to read it the way Honda Marketing intended it to be read: http://www.honda.ca/crz#/crz/parts-accessories

1) The armrest comes WITH STORAGE inside. Like, you can use the space that exists INSIDE it. Get it? The basic idea was for a $20 plastic armrest, a $5 lid and $350 for the right to use the space that Honda allowed to exist inside: Genius engineering and an opportunity to advance into corporate level accessory marketing campaign level III.

2) The auto-dimming rear view mirror comes with, get this, a compass. This is a fairly new, modern, development (247 B.C) that can be used as a backup for your GPS and smart-phone mapping system in case you get seriously lost on your way back home. I remember my grandfather's '74 Cadillac Fleetwood Brougham had one of these standard. Anyway, that's not the point. Honda must have a dozen or so containers full of these things laying around in the patio and had to come with a plan to unload it all before the next century. Hey why not? Compass costs $12, 'the attachment' goes for $200 and the dimming feature comes for free because nobody in the Marketing Department knows how the physics on it works anyway.

3) Finally, the rubber mats: Well, get this, they are ALL SEASON RUBBER MATS.  See, you can use them all-year round. No longer just during Spring. Or Winter: ALL SEASONS.  No more worries about mats evaporating, melting or disintegrating due to change of seasons.  This is worth at least $160 or so per mat (you'll need four).

BTW while you are configuring your CRZ, you may want to double-check that the ADD guys making the website are not the same ones putting the car together while the Quality Control guys are out on the weekly team-building event.  Honda is listing 17" alloy wheels as an interior accessory and the engine block heater as exterior accessory. Maybe they envision the customer leaving the lot with a set of $2,200 wheels inside the car and a $200 block heater extension dangling outside.




 

[Mike]

^ ^

[whaddaiknow]

it IS funny AND true

[diceman]

Another poor design from Honda. At least they're predictable.

[JohnM]

So according to the Day 3 report, the CR-Z is very nimble and a lot of fun to drive.  No surprise there.

There will be those who say this is not enough but probably any more straight line performance is merely ego boost.

Through the mists of time I remember that Alfa's and BMWs were the only real sports sedans in the early '70s.  The Bimmers had more power although neither car weighed more than 2300 pounds or had more than 140HP.   

One Bimmer enthusiast was giving an Alfa owner a good workover on how slow the Alfas were.  The Alfa owner invited the Bimmer keener to go for a ride with him.

On their return, the Bimmerist opened the passenger door and basically poured himself out on to the pavement.  Debate settled.

The point is anything will go fast if you flog it and in a sporty car this will be controllable and fun.   Top speed and massive power simply cannot be used on the street.

I hope the CR-Z does very well - it deserves to.

Cheers,
John Meyer

[Erik]

I am sure not getting too worked up over the performance of this. As an old Honda guy, I loved every CRX. I learned to drive stick in an original CRX. No, those were not fast, but there have been damn few cars that were as much fun, or as sporty, to drive. I look forward to driving one real soon.

[Gary]

I think Honda has missed the mark with this car.  They could have offered a sporty new coupe with looks, low weight, handling, quickness and good gas mileage.  They got the looks and they got decend gas mileage, but failed on the weight, handling and quickness because they decided to be cute and build a heavy hybrid that is not quick.  Added complication and weight intead of just putting in a 1.8 or 2.0 litre engine in the car.  My Honda dealer has sold zero of these cars.  I wished him luck, but he is going to need it.  Very low demand for this car with a hybrid setup.  Demand would be there if it had a regular, fuel-efficient gas engine that went faster, was lighter and therefore fit the expectations of a sporty coupe enthusiast.  Hope they get it right before this model is discontinued.

[Snowdog]

I am sure not getting too worked up over the performance of this. As an old Honda guy, I loved every CRX. I learned to drive stick in an original CRX. No, those were not fast, but there have been damn few cars that were as much fun, or as sporty, to drive. I look forward to driving one real soon.

People stuck in the mist of time, pointing out that that the CRZ is as fast as 20 year old CRX are failing to recognize that times have changed and there has been automotive progress in the last 20 years.

They also seem to be forgetting that 20 years ago, the CRX was actually quick for it's day, it would have been faster than trucks/vans/station wagons, and it would have been right on par with other sporty cars of the day like the Miata, and VW GTI.

Today, the CRZ is slower than SUVs/Minivans and much slower than sporty counterparts like VW GTI/Miata.

The CRX was quick among its contemporaries, the CRZ is an absolute dog amongst its contemporaries.

I owned a first generation Miata with this kind of performance and while it was reasonably fun, it was kind of slow 15 years ago!

I am starting to think about my next car and for a another point of comparison. I am thinking about a compact economy car. The new Focus, with Euro-tuned suspension, 160 HP, 146 ft-lb torque base engine. Which should out perform, out handle the CRZ, while getting up to 40 MPG on the highway. It will also cost less, and have back seat. In comparison the CRZ is just a sad joke.  No one should be making excuses for this poor showing from Honda.

[Shnak]

Today, the CRZ is slower than SUVs/Minivans and much slower than sporty counterparts like VW GTI/Miata.

Sorry to break the news to you, but 90% of the cars on the roads today are slower than the Sienna.

[Snowdog]

Sorry to break the news to you, but 90% of the cars on the roads today are slower than the Sienna.

I didn't mention the Sienna. The Sienna might be the fastest of the minivans, but they are all sub 8 seconds. So it isn't so much that Sienna is quick, but that Minivans are quick.
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/minivans-vans/1012_2011_toyota_sienna_se_vs_2011_honda_odyssey_ex_l_vs_2010_dodge_caravan_sxt_comparison/specs.html

But then again so are SUVs, and so are Sedans and so are other sporty cars..

In fact nearly everything today is quick, except the CRZ, and that is what makes is woefully sad effort from Honda.

15-20 years ago the CRZ might have been considered a quick, sporty car, but by today's standard, it is comically slow.

[Shnak]

The question is, does the CR-Z FEEL quick? James seems to think that it does feel quick. And for 21 or $22k, a vehicle that handles well and feels quick is pretty good, not to mention its better fuel economy due to being a hybrid.

Sure, it could be lighter, quicker or have better fuel economy... but overall, it's still a neat package that will attract some people.