The JDM ZF1 CR-Z looks much much better than the US/Canadian version IMHO. They got the nose length just right. :)

Would I buy one? If it were competitively priced, then why not. We never got the old CRX in the Philippines, so there's nothing else to compare it to apart from the 3rd-gen Prius.

As for all the detractors...keep in mind the ZF1 CR-Z is version 1 of a sporty hybrid. As most of us already know, Version 1 of anything isn't going to be perfect. The car isn't going to set the world on fire, but I think it's intended to get the ball rolling for other people/carmakers to better the formula. It doesn't matter if it basically uses the bones and mechanicals of a GE Fit. What matters is Honda was first out the door with it.

Is it any good? Only a test drive will say for sure. Until then, a verdict should be suspended.

 

that is impressive, definitely more utility than either of those open top cars. the point though is if it's a fun car, utility is still secondary to its capabilities in the fun department. there are other cars with utility, get outstanding mileage, and can be had for a fraction of the price. the civic hatch comes to mind.

i understand what you're saying regarding used vs. new cars. while it is a perspective, i just don't buy it. not everyone has an infinite amount of money. buying a new car may be satisfying for subjective reasons. but money is money, and with the info that is available now for the crz, objectively it just isn't a compelling option for a fun car. another way of putting it - i haven't written off the car because it has yet to come to america, but based on the published info, i really don't expect much.

on another note, japanese and american driving habbits are different forced by terrain, crusing speeds, vehicle weights that differ by market, the way speed laws are enforced, etc. but i'll read through that link, i am curious as to what folks are getting in the real world.

 

completely disagree on that point. the turbo is an elegant solution. that some kits are slapped together doesn't change the fact that the turbo doesn't require extra belts, or add parasitic drag.

take an NA engine to a high altitude and compare its performance to an FI engine. why do you think that aircraft capable of operating at high altitude use turbine engines or FI on a reciprocating engine? because performance in a wide range of conditions, or in particularly adverse conditions, matters more in real life than how technically advanced an engine lineup is.

you're a track guy. you of all people would recognize this. "but my honda's engine is the most advanced production motor in the world" means nothing when getting your doors blown off by a fox body mustang, with it's live rear axle and vanila ice 5-point-oh.

 

..then why continue to compare a brand new "fun" hybrid in a new market demographic against a used car with a niche market for petrol heads who just want to go fast? that's my only gripe about your post(s). instead, a fair comparison would be against the insight (both 1st and 2nd gen) or the prius (both 1st and 2nd gen). IMO when you pit the crz against those cars, there's plenty to be excited about.

if i remember right, steve jobs said, "the best ideas are the ones that aren't widely accepted upon its first impression." while a "fun" hybrid has no place in the current market, honda will create one because of the crz -- the same way apple lead the portable mp3/media player market with with the iPod.

 

the flip side to that coin is that not all ideas initially un-accepted turn into wildly successful products. i actually am not against a hybrid sports car. the evo 11 is projected to have a hybrid drivetrain, maybe even motors in hub. that's going to be fantastic because it could lead to real advances in torque vectoring and being able to have serious control authority at individual wheels, not just how the front and rear wheels are coupled, and not just vectoring existing torque at the rear only.

all these strict definitions of only compare hybrids to hybrids, sports cars to sports car, and don't mix old and new just seem crazy to me. cross-shopping is inevitable, even though the marketing department wants you to stick to their list of what's ok to compare.

still, my personal bank account will fund whatever purchase. my bank account is not like the government's, which has different colors of money depending on what's being paid for (such as travel, payroll, acquisition of new equipment - they all come out of different funding sources). i understand that the new car will be more expensive. i also understand that a used car isn't automatically a POS, and it's perfectly logical to weigh the price of alternatives. again, because it's my money that pays for a new or used car. therefore, i will cross-shop.

bottom line, the crx seems a bit underwhelming in general and a bit overpriced relative to what it offers.

 

I believe the reason for all the compromise can be found here Report: Honda CR-Z was almost killed twice, U.S. dealers didn't want it — Autoblog Green It's too bad Honda doesn't just offer a hybrid and non-hybrid version. Although I can see that too leaving consumers somewhat confused. It was so much simpler the first time when they offered the HF, CRX & Si.

 

I like what Mugen has done with it, what do you think?

 

Not a fan of what Mugen did with the grille/front bumper but otherwise it's cool.

Those Mugen GP wheels are overdone though. I'd have thought Mugen would come up with something more unique or bespoke for the ZF1 CR-Z.

 

Same here, not fond of the grill, but I guess it sort of does look like the older wide Honda H. hahaha Not sure if that was what they were going for or not. Also not a fan of their exhaust outlet they chose, same as on the CTR.

If the ¥/$ wasn't so horrible, I would not mind picking one of these up, but the model I would like, which is not fully loaded already is about ¥2.6 million or just under $30k. That is almost $8k more than I paid for the Fit and not equipped as well either.

I am really liking the exterior look of the CR-Z though, now if Honda would also offer it with amber dash lighting instead of that spaceage blue hue...yuck.

I have a feeling the fun ride that is present with the Fit will easily be replicated with the CR-Z and might even surpass it some. Waiting for more tuners to get their hands on it, both for looks and performance.

 

This is how i feel about it i rather spend less and get a Fit. The MPG is about the same as the fit and has less room in it for a more expensive price tag Why would u want to buy this car. Now i would also have to say some brought up a S2000 in this. The S is a way different car but look at my sig the MPG in them is not so bad if u ask me for how much fun they are. Also i do like the looks of the CR-Z but does not seem like a great bang for the buck. Let's see 122hp 38mpg at best inless they are under rated and a price tag of $21k i believe. Now lets see Fit 109hp or 117hp. And best MPG is 35. But we all know that honda way under rated the fits. My 08 use to get 39-41mpg every day with me driving sperited oh and a price tag of $14900 and $19000 with navi. So to me look at the stats simple choice if i am in the market for a good priced economy car with ok MPG is fun to drive and has some room in it. I don't see where the CR-Z would come into play if there is allready a fit out. Inless the MPG is way under rated in the CR-Z. And also the new Insight that starts out at $19k if i wanted a hybrid car. So if u ask me this car won't sell inless the sales team is good at selling

 

I think the car sucks. BUT, i think ignorant hybrid people will still buy it. "Oh look, a hybrid sports car, lets save the enviorment and look cool at the same time!!".
I think Hybrids and people that own them are dumb...Diesels much better.

 

have you seen what comes out of a diesel tailpipe? do you honestly like driving diesel vehicles?

 

To be honest with you i could care less about this whole "saving the environment" via driving less polluting cars thing. It will not make a difference if you look at the big picture, its a big scam.

But yeah Diesel cars are badass, crazy range, nice MPGs especially on the highway, and loads of torque. Id buy a BMW 335d if i had the money.

And ill add, the new diesel vehicles are crazy clean, the diesel bimmers for example.

 

+1

I like driving my non fuel efficient boosted AWD car. My friend with a Prius always brags about how he's helping save the environment and I tell him that's cool...since I'm probably polluting enough in my car for the both of us. -__- *shrugs*

 

i would have to disagree. like driving catless, imo, is pretty irresponsible. the little things could be the difference in going over the tipping point.

personally, i don't like driving diesel cars. low end power is nice and all but lots of instantaneous torque means heavier gearboxes, drivetrain, etc that make for heavier cars. ruins the driving dynamics, for me.

i agree that there are modern diesels that are pretty good, but still constitute a small portion of all diesels in existence. especially in america. hard to argue with the mileage, kinda like a hybrid, but the entry price of a clean diesel in america is a pretty stiff premium over a gas engine. and the price of diesel is no joke.

i know the process for making a hybrid has its own significant environmental penalties that offset their over-time benefits, but there really is no choice. people writ large need to be more responsible with the environment. the secondary and tertiary effects that would follow from mismangement have the potential to be devastating.

 

Its just too little too late. Theres no way we could save the damage thats already done/being done. So why not enjoy driving some fun cars! Plus those battery's have to go somewhere when they die heh.

 

I have yet to drive a turbocharged car that I 100% enjoy driving. I HATE the throttle response. there is NO way of eliminating the lag that is inherent in these motors. I enjoy the engineering involved in the NA motor. I realize the draw backs of altitude etc, but driving a 100HP NA car is more fun to me then a 350HP turbo car.

Im a track guy and would be Aok with a fox body blasting my doors of down the back straight then giving him a nice bump mid corner and through esses.

Rate of acceleration no matter how great you will become accustom too and always want more. The thrill of balancing the grip of all 4 tires with 3 inputs is what gets me going, not pressing the loud pedal and getting pushed in my seat.

I also love learning and finding out all of the small intricacies involved in the engineering and design of the high HP/L motors. So to me the owning and taking care of the "best designed" production motor does mean something to me. 2.0L 200HP > 400hp 6.0L . Guess its all a matter of opinion.

I see what your saying about new vs old because you can make some smart moves. I did. I got my car for 11k less the MSRP with only 10k miles. But most of the time as the initial purchase price goes down repair cost also grow. Being on this forum being car people we dont much care as we fix most things ourselves, however many people value their warranties.

 

Also most people who buy these "HYBRIDS" don't save the planet they actully drive more often and futher due to geting better MPG. How's that going to save the planet. If u drive a car and u want to save the planet with ur car it's simple DRIVE LESS. Plan ahead on trips that way u make one instead of a couple. Once again most hybrid drivers are doing worst damage if u ask me by driving more often than if they had a normal car. Why not try doing things at home to save the world, shut off lights when not using them and conserve water things like this

 

lag has never been an issue at track engine speeds for me.

i just have a hard time believing that you really prefer 200hp just bc it came form a NA motor over 400hp just bc it came from something FI. sure, turbo motors have a particular rpm at which they wake, but you should never be below that range anyway if you're doing something exciting or something that requires real throttle work. "best" can mean a lot of things, so i won't go on about how we disagree about what's important.

i understand though that driving slow cars at their limit and outclassing a driver in a superior car is satisfying. we can probably swap stories about that. but, as much as i love inital d, initial d is to driving cars fast as what the WWF is to the world of martial arts/fighting/wrestling.

warranties? i probably gave mitsu and honda 5 reasons a piece to void my warrantee within 100 miles of buying the car.

 

Hmm yea really depends on the turbo on the lag really. Like when i had my evo 8. The turbo spooled at 3krpms and hit hard till red line. Now my CR does not even kick in to vetec to around 6krpms. So i would say my S is funner to drive but the evo felt like it had no lag time at all i would buy another one in a second if i had extra cash