Real world 0-60 time

[GoHuskies]

I was reading comments over at edmunds.com (Mine finally got posted....) Noticed one poster is claiming 0-60 in 7 seconds with the "automatic" using the sport mode.

Now I assume reviewers would have thought to test this car already using sport mode, with results that seem to be about 8.5 seconds for the stick, 9.5 seconds for CVT. (I'm aware motortrend has 8.3 seconds on the stick but everyone else is doubting that #)

I downloaded pocketdyno but in response to my download it has been raining here everyday leaving me iffy with trying to launch a car at night on slick roads.

Has anyone run your car with a dyno app yet or a real test?

Link to edmunds: Poster is "Tk"
2011 Honda CR-Z Consumer Review

[RiseAgainst197]

No not yet but Edmunds also gave a claim of 8.8 sceonds in there test. I havent thought about going back to the drag strip yet. Though a few of my friends have asked me to. We will see

[Honad]

I think the "Test drivers" at edmunds don't know how to launch. I'm just sayin'.

[TCroly]

In the current (November) issue of Car and Driver they have published a 9.6 second 0-60 time for a 6 speed CRZ EX.

I must say that this time doesn't really compute as in the October issue they tested an 09 Honda fit 5 speed and got 8.3 seconds. The fit did weigh 120 pounds less, but that would not be enough to make it faster than the CRZ given the added acceleration from the IMA on the CRZ.

They put a note saying that all acceleration runs were done with a fully charged battery. They accomplished this by selecting first gear and holding the engine at 3000-4000 rpm until the charge indicator showed a full charge. I do wonder if the technique in some way may have actually hurt the acceleration runs.

Motor Trend published 8.3 seconds back in July.

[RiseAgainst197]

Well atleast they launched better than the testers out of Japan. 10-10.5 seconds is a bit slower to 60mph.

[RiseAgainst197]

Originally Posted by TCroly

In the current (November) issue of Car and Driver they have published a 9.6 second 0-60 time for a 6 speed CRZ EX.

I must say that this time doesn't really compute as in the October issue they tested an 09 Honda fit 5 speed and got 8.3 seconds. The fit did weigh 120 pounds less, but that would not be enough to make it faster than the CRZ given the added acceleration from the IMA on the CRZ.

They put a note saying that all acceleration runs were done with a fully charged battery. They accomplished this by selecting first gear and holding the engine at 3000-4000 rpm until the charge indicator showed a full charge. I do wonder if the technique in some way may have actually hurt the acceleration runs.

Motor Trend published 8.3 seconds back in July.

A co-worker let me drive his 2008 Honda Fit sport 5sp before I drove/purchased my CRZ. I can tell you for sure that my CRZ !CVT! is faster than that Fit. My CRZ would say to the Fit.

8.3 sounds a little fast for the Fit. Was that possibly down a slight grade.

[TCroly]

Originally Posted by RiseAgainst197

A co-worker let me drive his 2008 Honda Fit sport 5sp before I drove/purchased my CRZ. I can tell you for sure that my CRZ !CVT! is faster than that Fit. My CRZ would say to the Fit.

8.3 sounds a little fast for the Fit. Was that possibly down a slight grade.

2009 fits have been tested multiple times by dozens of car mags and always come up at 8.3 to 8.5 0-60, so that is a pretty reliable number.

Keep in mind that the 117 hp 2009 fits are about a second faster from 0-60 than the 109 hp 2007-2008 vintage. Which brings up an interesting comment made in the C&D article. the note that the gas engine in the CRZ while identical in displacement with the current 117 hp engine in the fit is really closer to the first generation fit's 1.5 liter in the Honda L series engine family tree.

I had read so many time before that the CRZ's engine was the same power-plant as in the fit I assumed they meant the same as the current fit. But apparently this is not the case.

[RiseAgainst197]

Originally Posted by TCroly

2009 fits have been tested multiple times by dozens of car mags and always come up at 8.3 to 8.5 0-60, so that is a pretty reliable number.

Keep in mind that the 117 hp 2009 fits are about a second faster from 0-60 than the 109 hp 2007-2008 vintage. Which brings up an interesting comment made in the C&D article. the note that the gas engine in the CRZ while identical in displacement with the current 117 hp engine in the fit is really closer to the first generation fit's 1.5 liter in the Honda L series engine family tree.

I had read so many time before that the CRZ's engine was the same power-plant as in the fit I assumed they meant the same as the current fit. But apparently this is not the case.

Wow, a full second faster 0-60mph with just a 8hp peak. There must be quite a big pick-up in the torque/power curve in the new motor of the Fit. Maybe a huge improvement in tranmission components or chassis. ??

[bizzybear]

i read somewhere else that the CR-Z's 1.5L engine was closer to the 1st-gen Fit... but i first read that it was closer to the +09 Fit... who actually knows which one it's closer to??

on the times, the 6MT i test drove certainly seemed a lot quicker than the 9.6 times... my guess would be around the 8.5 time would be about right... tho, once i learn to drive it, if 7s are possible i for sure will get to it...

[GoHuskies]

Someone should download an app and be the first to post a real world test run!







Not me