I'm canadian french, my english isn't really good, sorry if I say funny things.

 

Apology not needed whatsoever. I was just ribbing you. I knew what you meant.

 

Good side by side shots with a Fit. It's a little smaller than I thought, and is almost the same height as the si coupe. These pics make it look even tinier due to the perspective.





Regardless of it's performance or value compared to the competition, it's a neat car. There is a lot more to like about it than people are giving it credit for. There is no other car like it on the road. If the price tag were a little lower, I think it would be a hot item.

 

see the tests of the CR-Z it is not a sport coupe car , it's based on the insight chasis, its slow, doesn't handle well, and the look is ok. It's basically just an economy sport version of the insight and a lot less cargo room then the Fit.

 

O RLY?









10 char lix my ballz

 

watch the edmunds youtube test drive of the CR-Z
they refer the CR-Z, a sporty version of the insight

YouTube - ‪2011 Honda CR-Z‬‎

 

Fast is not necessarily the same as fun. The Fit is one of the slower cars on the road, and we'd all agree that it is fun. A Jeep wrangler is perhaps the only slower vehicle, and it's a blast to drive. Personality and charm win over stats every time.

 

This car is a blast to drive....I'd venture to say the people who say it isn't have their heads up their asses (such as some if these dumb reviewers from Edmunds) or haven't driven the car.

I spent extensive time behind both the manual and CVT versions of the CRZ...man it's a great little car.

It doesn't have the utility of the Fit bit it's so much better in everyway...for one it's much better built IMO...particularly the interior feel, fit and finish.

 

It's true that the interior is nice, even if the plastic aren't soft like VAG plastics, they feel nice, but what is wrong is simply that it's too muched asked price wise, compared to the power/fuel economy.
And the fit must handle better with a few mods since it's lighter.

 

I would hope the fit & finish would be better. For a $4300 price difference (Fit base $14900 vs CR-Z base $19200) and not too much better mpg and performance difference. If not then Honda would really have shot themselves in the foot. Who would want to pay $4300 more for a two door Fit with no back seat/storage and a almost useless heavy battery if the quality wasn't slightly better? The Fit is a cheap econo car. The Insight / CR-Z are slightly higher end cars. My a$$ cheeks better be in heaven for $4300 more in the CR-Z. I would hope they didn't waste $4300 on just a battery.

 

Well, I know it's not the most common way of looking at things, but at least that extra $4300 is more safely invested than some other brands because it's a Honda. You'd have to spend even a bit more than CR-Z to get "cheek heaven" anyways. Plus, you are comparing a base model Fit to a more well-appointed car. Let's keep the comparisons between Sport and CR-Z. I could just as easily say how a stripped down Versa makes more sense than a Fit.

It's qualitative and styling differences need to be evaluated in person before the bashing. What's with the focus on numbers that "enthusiasts" parrot all over the net from car reviews? This "more is better" thing is just a result of marketing and corporations out to compete with each other for more of your dollars!

The criticisms of the CR-Z and people's opinions of it on this forum are understandable, but I'd be happy for American enthusiasts start to see things a little more practically and make the most of what they have and respect what it does well - because the car company that created it aligned it to be competitive within a market, and surely it has some standout qualities.

Track cars are different, and why someone would choose a brand new hybrid over a real performance car for that scenario is beyond me. So, for those of you who want something faster, or whatever - go get it - because there certainly isn't a shortage of fast, good handling...whatever you want, out there on the used market for half the cost of a CR-Z. Saying that you need a DD/track car (with a warranty that is useless for track-time) will have trade-offs period.

So, is the CR-Z worth the money? Yes, for the most part. Would a lot of people be happier spending that money on a different car? Yes, for the most part. I think the styling plus the mileage alone is enough of a winning combo when you consider that the real-world mpgs are a lot higher than the sticker, but those may not be valuable qualities to someone else.

Would people rather not have variety, and send the message to our car companies that we want a 22 year old CR-X instead? WTF? That comparison is ridiculous btw. Like Honda couldn't make a car than beats the pants of a CR-X for even less money, today than it took back then without the restrictions placed on the auto industry. Wait, what? Auto industries have to adhere to all those things I constantly hear about them doing, but fail to recognize every time I spout off crap on the internet about one of their products?

 

I'm just going to respond to this because honestly the rest was a long confusing rant.

Why should you? The Fit Base is the same quality as the Sport. I was comparing apples to apples Fit Base (Stick) to BASE CR-Z (Stick).
Fine you want to compare Fit Sport (5M Navi) $18260 to a CR-Z (6M Navi) $22560...oh wow look still $4300 difference . Let me reiterate for you...my point was for $4300 I hope the quality was slightly better than a Fit...simple as that. There is nothing wrong with the CR-Z different strokes for different folks. I'm just saying for that much of a price difference it's good the fit and finish is above the Fit.

 

If the CR-Z was not a hybrid and had about 150-160 hp I would have considered it. But its just too much money for what I was looking for and I'm not interested in a hybrid.

 

For what it's worth, going from the manual Fit Sport, (the only one in the lineup I want) to the base CR-Z is a difference of $2790. You can't get the Sport w/nav and a manual btw. The quality is better than the Fit. Every person I've heard talk about the car mentions the nice interior. I hovered over one at the dealership the other day, and there is no mistaking - it's a nicer car.

Most people on here agree that the Sport package on the Fit is a good value, and the addition of the nav is not. You can go with looking at the cars as a marketing package, or as the actual car itself. Check one out if you haven't already. I haven't driven one, so I can't comment further. Sorry for rehashing this topic, but with a new concept like this, it's interesting to discuss it's appeal.

 

If it were a perfect world, I would take the CR-Z...................................... and dump gratuitous amounts of money into engine-swap, performance upgrades, weight reduction and make an insane track car.

However, it is NOT a perfect world. The Fit is more practical, and better value in my opinion, for the every day person. go ahead....flame away

 

Considering that the civic and even the accord usdm has horrible fit and finish (compared to the ones in the 90's) I think the crz is pretty decent. The seats are well maintaining and offer more settings, the dash looks cool and the plastic isn't soft but feels thick and a bit like rubber (probably won't be easy to scratch like in the fit).
But it's still a steal 20k for a lowered 2 seater fit with a hybrid system that barely counterweight the actual weight of the system.
They should make a non electric crz with the 1.5 or the 1.8 for 16-17k.

 

I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that you are not the target market for the CR-Z... It could be me though...


As for the CR-Z, as Hayden said, the difference in comparabily equipped vehicles is less than 2800. with the difference in economy, over 60K miles (the warranty on both), you can subtract another $730 (at the current Price of Gas - $2.60). factor in a few additional things such as Rear Disc Brakes, finer interior materials, a 6MT and the difference in cost seems to dwindle even more. Granted there are a few missing things such as Fog lights from the base CR-Z which will increase the price but I think overall once all is said and done, the "Huge" difference in price isn't that huge.

Is it for everybody? no... (especially not TurboManGT )Is it for some? Yes.

If I didn't need a back seat & 4 doors, It would be a consideration of mine.

~SB

 

Yea the 09's were able to have navi and manual. I forgot the 10's stopped that. Yahoo auto still has it marked wrong on their website.

2010 Honda Fit | New Honda Hatchbacks - Yahoo! Autos

I do want to check one out. I went to the honda dealership down the road from me two weeks ago but they were not in yet. I will have to take one for a test drive sometime soon. For me though no matter how nice a car it is when it comes down to it the Fit is just way to practical to even compare to the CR-Z for an every day car for me. I need a 4 seater with storage but still gets good gas mileage.
Don't get me wrong though I am a fan of the CR-Z...in its own special way.

 

If you're referring to the 5MT Fit, you're out of your gord. 0-60 in 8.3 secs is about average for today's cars. That's even a little quicker than your average 4cyl mid size family sedan. If you're referring to the 5AT Fit, you're still off. There are many cars out there as slow or slower than the Fit. Do you think SUVs are fast?

 

Additional review of the CR-Z....

2011 Honda CR-Z EX - Road Test - Auto Reviews - Car and Driver

Sums it up pretty much right here...

"A buyer confined to a Honda showroom could get the more practical, more efficient five-door Insight for essentially the same money. Or, for a lot less money, there’s the Fit: slightly less efficient, but better in almost every way—and quicker. This will likely curse CR-Z sales no matter how good-looking it is."

"The CR-Z, in short, is good, but it’s not great like the Fit and the old CRX. It’s green but not Insight green. It’s fun to drive and looks cool. If its narrow appeal does bring buyers into Honda showrooms, they will likely find a more practical offering to the left of the CR-Z, and to its right."