Honda CR-Z Hybrid Car Forums banner

Honda shooting themselves in the foot??

  • Yes

    Votes: 10 27.8%
  • No

    Votes: 26 72.2%
1 - 20 of 37 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,333 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I think so :popcorn:

See the failure of Honda that i see, is that they are killing their own hybrids with regular gas engine cars... with the 40c/43h Insight2 and the CR-Z's 35c/39h... i'm not sure sales of those hugely underpowered (on paper) vehicles will be able to sell well given the 2012 Civic will be probably cheaper and a better value overall... my '09 Civic LX easily gets over 40mpg hwy driving around 70mph... and it's only rated at 36hwy @ like 55mph...

I had to hold off on buying a CR-Z b/c of issues with my license mostly and the fact that i would literally have to pay cash b/c my credit isn't great lol... but now that I'm waiting and seeing what Honda is coming out with now, the Civic for me seems to be the better value... i owned an '06 Si and loved the car so much that i had issues with my license haha... but after driving in an '09 LX sedan for a while, i realized that i don't need speed so much anymore, which is why i found the "hybrid" side a bit more appealing and i still do... but with the recent release of info about the 2012 Civic claiming 40mpg hwy for the regular Civic, that makes me wonder what the Hybrid will get... my guess would be around, if not, higher than the 50mpg hwy mark and probably over 40mpg city... so real world combined of close to 50mpg... that sounds way more appealing to me than what the CR-Z offers... now the HCH3 won't be sporty feeling... but that's nothing some aftermarket suspension tweaking can't fix...

point is, i don't see the value in the smaller Insight2 or CR-Z when the HCH will no doubt have much higher numbers in a larger car and a better build quality feel... sure the HCH3 will cost a bit more and some people will go for those other cars b/c of that, but i don't shop much by price...

to top it off my '06 Si was rated (when released) at 24c/32h with 2008 EPA those numbers dropped to 21c/29h... but mine easily got 32mpg on the highway and around 26-28 combined, beating the crap out of it, daily... the 2012 is supposed to be even more powerful and more fuel efficient that the previous gen... so my guess would put it around a conservative 26c/33h and will probably get closer to 36hwy and 29-30 combined real-world... price can't be much higher than the current gen, so figure around low $22k range starting... that's only about $1500-2K more than the EX CR-Z... and the value for $2k is DEFINITELY there...

with such a great option with the overall Civic package, why not create other Honda's that offer better overall value than the Civic?? it seems the lineup is like this:
(from lowest to highest)
Civic
Accord
Crosstour
then the rest of the SUVs

so to me, everything below the Civic is so entry level, that it's not really worth considering...


/rant
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
886 Posts
The civic is designed to be their best value, most generally appealing vehicle. If they can fill that market better than the other manufacturers it won't kill honda... it will carry them.

Is the civic's engine more powerful and more efficient than the cr-z? If so, why'd they use the engine they did in the cr-z?
 

·
Capt'n Jack
Joined
·
9,499 Posts
Dang Bizzy...

Now regretting trading in my 07 Civic loaded hybrid with Navi and HFP package and 18" rims since everything else is entry level including the CR-Z.

Not!! :rolleyes:

But then again, as I trade em in every 4 or 5 years, can't wait to see what comes later.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,333 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·
i didn't mean they were hurting themselves with the new Civic... the Civic will sell no matter what... and this new one will be an even bigger hit than the last one... i was referring to the cars considered under the Civic...

one thing that has been a bit of a gripe was why didn't Honda put the R18 (Civic motor) into the CR-Z then add the IMA?? that motor is more powerful and more fuel efficient than the current setup... and since the CR-Z is lighter, they could adjust the gearing to make it even more fuel efficient... i'm still lovin the CR-Z but with the new Civic coming out and the very little bit of info on it currently, i'm starting to be on shaky ground about considering getting a CR-Z...

they only thing keeping my interest in the CR-Z is the potential like what Bisimoto did... +500hp and still 40mpg... that's appealing...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
618 Posts
one thing that has been a bit of a gripe was why didn't Honda put the R18 (Civic motor) into the CR-Z then add the IMA?? that motor is more powerful and more fuel efficient than the current setup... and since the CR-Z is lighter, they could adjust the gearing to make it even more fuel efficient... i'm still lovin the CR-Z but with the new Civic coming out and the very little bit of info on it currently, i'm starting to be on shaky ground about considering getting a CR-Z...
I think that was answered here. ;) Seems like a logical path for an Si model.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,333 Posts
Discussion Starter · #6 ·
I think that was answered here. ;) Seems like a logical path for an Si model.
in my own thread nonetheless :D


i get it and all... but what i'm saying is there's no way Honda will come out with a more powerful, more fuel efficient CR-Z... which would be a perfect example of shooting themselves in the foot lol... now they HAVE to release a more powerful, but less FE CR-Z if they do a more powerful version when they could've easily released a more powerful and FE CR-Z from the beginning...

standard 1.8L 140hp + IMA 13hp = 153hp CR-Z... and since the 1.8L already gets 36hwy in the heavier Civic, they could've done this for sure...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,071 Posts
In America, Civic is a domestic model. CR-Z, Insight and Fit are built and imported from Japan. That can make Civic to have lower building cost advantage.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Beside HP and MPG, there are some other factors to consider. CO2 and engine displacement. They may be ignored by USA market but they are important elsewhere.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
91 Posts
I bought a CRZ and traded in my European Civic Type S GT. I don't regret it but if the new Civic had been the alternative I would have probably gone for this instead. When the new European Civic finally comes out I will probably go this route. Looking forward to seeing the European Civic too. No offence, but the current one is much better looking than the current US one.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,149 Posts
Personally I think Honda started to shoot itself in the foot with the demise of the NSX and sped up that downward spiral with the end of the S2000.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,221 Posts
I think the car we have is more of a stopgap to a better model.

Other companies have done the same, the GTO for the USA came with a weaker 5.7L engine then moved to a 6.0L.

I think the 1.5L IMA motor works well in taxation markets like Japan and Europe. In the US I bet we'll see the rumored turbo engine lineup come into play with a 1.6L turbo + IMA. Those of us who bought early got the short end of the stick.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
68 Posts
I went to the CRZ from a 196hp turbo charged car so that tells you that speed and power is not everything. At the same time there were more fuel efficient cars that i could have chosen.

Numbers and specs in general are not the be all and end all in choosing a car.

Just look at the damn CRZ! It looks fantastic and drives great. Sit at the driver's seat and admire the cοckpit! There is nothing quite like it in that price range or higher.

There is no other car i wanted so much like it and it's also my first Honda.

I couldn't disagree more with the title of this thread.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
395 Posts
Value schmalue -- lot's of us just want a specific car, I left a 2007 300hp modified Acura TL Type S for the CR-Z -- I don't see how an enthusiast can think honda is blowing it, I really don't -- This is the best generation of Honda cars in a decade and next generation looks to be the best that they have ever made.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
360 Posts
I'm a little put off that the new Civics might be getting as good/better gas mileage than the new CR-Z while possibly outperforming it as well.

However, the other part of the equation for me is how much less emissions the CR-Z produce compared to the current generation Civics.

I had a 2008 Civic that I could get highway fuel economy at least what the CR-Z gets. The CR-Z easily beats my Civic's city mileage. Comparing the emissions ratings between the 2 cars reveals the CR-Z is by far the cleaner vehicle.

It will be interesting to see what the specs are on the new Civics when they're released.

I still love my CR-Z, especially the looks (inside and out - love the instrument cluster), handling and fuel economy.

I want Honda to succeed with all of their line up, even the vehicles I personally don't care for (Pilot and Ridgeline). I think the new Civics will be very successful for them.

Lee
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,333 Posts
Discussion Starter · #17 · (Edited)
Personally I think Honda started to shoot itself in the foot with the demise of the NSX and sped up that downward spiral with the end of the S2000.
while i semi-agree... this wasn't the topic of conversation :p
I think the car we have is more of a stopgap to a better model.

Other companies have done the same, the GTO for the USA came with a weaker 5.7L engine then moved to a 6.0L.

I think the 1.5L IMA motor works well in taxation markets like Japan and Europe. In the US I bet we'll see the rumored turbo engine lineup come into play with a 1.6L turbo + IMA. Those of us who bought early got the short end of the stick.
if Honda comes out with that turbo CR-Z and still keep the IMA, then my decision is made and i'll go with the CR-Z...
I went to the CRZ from a 196hp turbo charged car so that tells you that speed and power is not everything. At the same time there were more fuel efficient cars that i could have chosen.

Numbers and specs in general are not the be all and end all in choosing a car.

Just look at the damn CRZ! It looks fantastic and drives great. Sit at the driver's seat and admire the cοckpit! There is nothing quite like it in that price range or higher.

There is no other car i wanted so much like it and it's also my first Honda.

I couldn't disagree more with the title of this thread.
good for you!!
Value schmalue -- lot's of us just want a specific car, I left a 2007 300hp modified Acura TL Type S for the CR-Z -- I don't see how an enthusiast can think honda is blowing it, I really don't -- This is the best generation of Honda cars in a decade and next generation looks to be the best that they have ever made.
i didn't say Honda is "blowing it," i said shooting in their foot... meaning, why come out with a car that's going to be cheaper as a base model that offers a lot more that the CR-Z in terms of space, power AND efficiency??

the CR-Z is a hard sale for some people when they compare with what's out there... and now Honda has made that sale even harder IMO...
I'm a little put off that the new Civics might be getting as good/better gas mileage than the new CR-Z while possibly outperforming it as well.

However, the other part of the equation for me is how much less emissions the CR-Z produce compared to the current generation Civics.

I had a 2008 Civic that I could get highway fuel economy at least what the CR-Z gets. The CR-Z easily beats my Civic's city mileage. Comparing the emissions ratings between the 2 cars reveals the CR-Z is by far the cleaner vehicle.

It will be interesting to see what the specs are on the new Civics when they're released.

I still love my CR-Z, especially the looks (inside and out - love the instrument cluster), handling and fuel economy.

I want Honda to succeed with all of their line up, even the vehicles I personally don't care for (Pilot and Ridgeline). I think the new Civics will be very successful for them.

Lee
trust me, that was one of my main arguing points that the emissions is better on the CR-Z... but the current Civic was already ULEV with the Si being LEV... they might not reach SULEV on the new Civic, but the emissions aren't that high on them either way... the CR-Z's AT-PZEV status comes mainly from being able to shut off during a stop, hence the "Zero" part of that status... the new Civic is supposed to have "Econ" assist, and it wouldn't be too hard for Honda to add in "Idle Stop" to the car which would probably give it similar status...

i can't argue with you the other points b/c i really do love the CR-Z... but for someone like me who is a little Honda biased, but not vehicle specific, i can choose from the entire lineup...

Estimates:
new Civic = better mpg, better engine performance, handling similar
new Si = similar (maybe a bit less) mpg, drastically better engine performance, vastly superior handling

those are HARD competitors for me...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
618 Posts
Bizzy, no offense, but I think you're fixated on numbers from conventional cars and trying to compare that to an "unconventional" car. In that:

A. You really can't use hp as metric to judge the CR-Z as the torque comes on so strong at low rpm and then tapers off... it's almost an inverse profile compared to a normally aspirated non-hybrid engine. It was this driving response that I really liked about the CR-Z as it reminded me of a turbo diesel.


(The dashed line is just the performance of the CR-Z gas engine without the IMA.) The CR-Z makes peak torque below 1800 rpm, and this really affects how you drive it.

B. You also need to use combined mpg numbers to compare cars as the hwy numbers alone don't tell the whole story. The difficulty is that the way the EPA tries to "adjust" hybrid mpg numbers still makes comparisons difficult. Also, given the amount of torque above at low revs, you can be in a much higher gear without fear of lugging the engine. I'm willing to bet that the EPA city driving cycle does not shift the CR-Z in an optimum manner, but more like a conventional car.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,333 Posts
Discussion Starter · #19 ·
not sure i get your points... but i DID mention MY decision to buy a CR-Z has been shaken by this info and the upcoming 2012 Civic release... I drive more highway than city, so that is the more important number to me... and even when i'm in the city, i use some pretty good driving techniques to maximize the FE in the city... that is how i got 42mpg on a recent trip to Ft Lauderdale 433miles on the ODO with 3 gas bars left... that was a mix of about 38% aggressive city driving b/c i was following a friend in a 2011 M3 that drives a bit faster than normal ppl lol...

the current Civic also has adequate torque for city driving w/o the added assist for IMA... and since i'm driving an automatic, i don't redline it (as much :p)... a 2.0L engine will likely have more torque than the CR-Z... this makes a huge difference considering Honda engines have a very flat torque curve, which just means 90% of peak torque at even low rpms...

do you see my points and why i'm thinking the better value (fun, performance, fuel efficiency, etc) would be to get a Civic over the CR-Z?? maybe not, but that's ok... i still love the CR-Z, like i mentioned above... but unless Honda has a trick up their sleeve to make it better, i'm gonna have to choose the Civic again...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
579 Posts
I'm still suprised that we've not seen the 2012 Crz announced yet. A legit version, not concepts and theorized versions. I'm assuming it will be the same as the 2011. But still, it's got me thinking. What's up with the delay?!
 
1 - 20 of 37 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top