+1

 

Excellent point I was definitely just thinking Si, I had forgotten all about the HF and its great MPG numbers. Although as you and others have pointed out in the past the cars in the late 80s didn't have all this extra safety weight to deal.

Thanks again for the review, keep em coming!

 

Thanks for the review, Mike, very informative. My Brother-in-law works for Honda and he just had a "ride and drive" with his dealer. He says it's an amazing car. He also points out that the EPA rating may be very, very, conservative. He says the car never dropped below 39mpg after a full day of hot doggin' it in sport mode on the test track.

 

As usual,nice review Mike.
A nice sporty-ish look compared to the usual boring looking small hybrids.
I like the dash layout too.Cost is decent too.

 

Yes, the CRX HF and the 3-cylinder Geo Metro XFi had some amazing fuel-mileage numbers. But they were acheieved at the cost of light weight, poor drivability from lean fuel-mixtures, low power, and, as you note, crash-protection.

Sure...anytime. But I don't know when I'll be able to do the next one. The Hyundai Equus, Lexus IS350AWD, and 2011 Ford Explorer have not yet been released. They are all on my list.

 

Sure...anytime.


I tried all three modes (Eco, Normal, Sport) in street driving (and slightly aggressive street driving) on the test-drive and it didn't seem to make much of a difference in the throttle/steering response, at least to my senses.

As for gas mileage, I didn't actually empty the tank and measure the MPG (I didn't have the car long enough for that)...I went strictly by the EPA and Honda's own numbers. It is possible (and I've done it many times) to better the EPA figures if you drive sensibly....sometimes, as in your brother's case, even not-so-sensibly. This is one area where actual ownership (or experience0 with the car may be more informative than a simple 1-hour or 1-day review.

But I have one question. Did your brother actually re-fill the tank himself, on a level surface (the level surface is important for accuracy), and physically measure what it took, or simply go by the trip-computer's MPG-average and miles-to-empty? I have found that those trip-devices are sometimes 1-2 MPG off the real figure verified by the gas pump.

 

Thanks.

Everyone's taste, of course, is different, but the dash is one of the car's features that, IMO, could be improved. The textures look nice, but there are a lot of hard-surfaces, very little if any padding, and the buttons/features are a little complex for my tastes.

I'm with you on the price, though (provided the dealers don't try mark-ups). From the factory, it's priced pretty reasonably for a hybrid, and the dealer I was at appeared to be honest about deal-making.

 

He was going by the cars on-board computer. Of course, it's not as accurate as actually checking it mathematically, but it's close enough, and worlds better than a SWAG. Anyway, he loved the car and thinks it will sell well. We'll see.

 

Yeah, I've learned not to trust trip computers, but to verify it at the pump....on a level surface so the gas-level inside the tank doesn't get skewed.

As far as sales go, I agree with him. I think we will see some healthy CR-Z sales, particularly with the manual transmission (if dealers stock enough manuals), but, we would probably see more if they did a non-hybrid version. The present IMA drive train, IMO, particularly with the CVT, is not well-suited to the car.

 

Thanks for the review. I have been waiting for the arrival of this car for a while now, since Japan market had it a few months before us. I love the exterior and interior of this car. Too bad from all the reviews I have read about this car so far are all claiming the lack of power and refinement from its IMA. I wish they could put a small dohc I4 into it and call it a Si. But still, good effort from Honda and at least give consumers a sporty hybrid to choose from.

 

It looks like a slingshot from the sides, but I don't like the interior - Honda's dropped the ball big time lately with too much cheap, hard and glossy plastic. The exception to the rule somewhat is the Accord and Civic.

I remember when Honda had nice and "soft" interiors with soft-touch dashboards and logically-laid out controls. My favorite of them were the older Accords.

 

Yes, the CR-Z does have a lot of hard dash-plastic. I mentioned that in the review. But is also has something that a lot of other cars don't have......superb-quality interior hardware/*****/controls, all assembled/installed with precision.

The Accord and Civic also have their share of hard interior plastics, but they also have superb interior hardware a well. Honda just seems to have a knack for desiging controls/*****, etc..... that turn and operate with solidness and fluid precision. Several other automakers (GM in particular) have also inproved quite a bit in this area lately.

 

Thank you sir for another amazing write up. I saw a grey one on the street yesterday. Looked a lot better than most people on this forum keep saying. I think Honda did a great job

 

Sure...anytime.

Yes, Honda and Toyota seem to have a habit of introducing many new models in the home Japanese market before we get them, although, being Japanese-flagged companies, that is probably not surprising. 10 years ago, in 2000, we had to stand in line, here in America, to see the 1Gen Insight and Prius....which had also previously been sold in Japan. (I was fortunate and got to drive one of the first Prius models into the D.C. area)

And, of course, there are models they sell in Japan, that, for various reasons, we never get at all.


Yes....I didn't base my own view of the IMA/CVT on that of other reviews, but it is clear that my opinion (and yours) are not alone. The 160 HP gas in-line-4 from the CR-V, with about the same level of torque, and a 6-speed manual or conventional automatic would, IMO, have been just about perfect. But, of course, the CR-Z's designers were no doubt looking at the upcoming EPA mileage standards, and wanted a high-MPG powertrain.

 

Sure...glad you enjoyed it. It's you guys (and some non-CL requests) that I do them for.

Yes...although the overall size is a little larger, the grille is now much larger/more pronounced, and the rear-end sweeps up a little more, otherwise, it's a remarkable retro-body design of the classic old CRX. The interior, though, is markedly different....they didn't play copy-cat inside like the new Mustangs and Camaros do.