Honda CR-Z Hybrid Car Forums banner
41 - 55 of 55 Posts

· Registered
Joined
·
2,560 Posts
The powertrain of the 2012 Civic employs lithium-ion rather than nickel-metal hydride batteries, as well as a larger 1.5-liter i-VTEC engine. Honda estimates a city-highway combined fuel economy of 45 m.p.g from the package.
WTF!?!? pretty much the same engine but a different battery and it gets so much better mileage?
 

· Premium Member
Joined
·
3,097 Posts
WTF!?!? pretty much the same engine but a different battery and it gets so much better mileage?
Now you see the dilemma with the CR-Z and its survivability and what I have been saying for months. However, I do believe the 2012 CR-Z will be more powerful and at the very least will have the Lithium battery which lasts longer and is more powerful which will provide more power to the electric motor which equals better MPG's and HP/ torque.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
1,217 Posts
WTF!?!? pretty much the same engine but a different battery and it gets so much better mileage?
If the Civic Hybrid for 2012 is anything like my former 06 model then the car is less aggressive about hidden battery charging. The CR-Z will more often try and leach some of your engine power to charge the battery when driving. The difference being my CR-Z almost never has a low enough charge to force a regen. The Civic would do it all the time in the city or moderate hills.

Less hidden regen means less friction and better over all fuel economy. Of course the car doesn't perform as well when the battery charge runs low. Being a more sporty model I think the CR-Z was designed to give up a couple potential MPG's in favor or keeping a healthy battery charge. I think the best evidence for this is the updates that lead the Civic Hybrid to drop from my 06 EPA of 45 highway to 43 highway.

Of course I'm sure there are a couple other factors at work, aerodynamics, or simply plain ole' newer technology at work.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
669 Posts
Here is an another article to back up a more powerful CR-Z from the New York Times. It looks like a turbo or S/C are out.

Honda Pledges to Boost CR-Z Power - NYTimes.com
The interesting thing about that article is that it suggests that the 1.5 is a "larger engine" in the Civic when the CR-Z is already 1.5.

One powertrain option for Honda is its revised integrated motor assist hybrid system, which appears in the 2012 Civic Hybrid due in American showrooms this spring. The powertrain employs lithium-ion rather than nickel-metal hydride batteries, as well as a larger 1.5-liter i-VTEC engine.
If I remember correctly, the current Civic Hybrid uses a 120 cell NiMh battery pack (vs. 84 cells for CR-Z) and the electric motor adds 20 hp (vs. 12hp). So, IMO, the gist of the article is correct, the Civic 'bones" are available, but not as stated. I think there is a possibility of pairing the larger Civic gas engine (1.8 liters 140 hp) with the larger Civic hybrid system. This is not a combination currently available and could yield 160 hp with ~190 ft lbs of torque. Weight could increase by a negligible ~20 lbs for the larger battery pack. With the addition of Li batteries, who knows how much electric power there might be on tap. Could they squeeze 30 hp out of the new system?

Edited to add: Maybe the NYT article was saying larger Civic engine because they were comparing it to the current Civic hybrid and not the CR-Z as I was originally thinking they meant
 

· Registered
Joined
·
58 Posts
Trust me when I say this, but we will not see any change to the current CR-Z platform until at least 2013. There is nothing that I can see that is indicative from Honda that they are activly pursuing parts changes for the 2012 model.

Now, what I may be seeing can change, but it takes lots of time to source new parts, make engineering changes, test the engineering changes and run all of the events that lead up to production start. The CR-Z is on a 2 year development cycle as it is, so just hold your horses on speculation.

The first official thing we will see from Honda will be at the Tokyo Motor Show in December.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
669 Posts
Trust me when I say this, but we will not see any change to the current CR-Z platform until at least 2013. There is nothing that I can see that is indicative from Honda that they are activly pursuing parts changes for the 2012 model.

Now, what I may be seeing can change, but it takes lots of time to source new parts, make engineering changes, test the engineering changes and run all of the events that lead up to production start. The CR-Z is on a 2 year development cycle as it is, so just hold your horses on speculation.
I agree wholeheartedly. They've got their hands full with Civic launch, Sub-TSX launch, and the Accord, RL, RDX, MDX and rumored Acura Coupe. Still, understanding how they 'think' I think it's somewhat safe to speculate that what ever they do, it will use common parts in it.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
58 Posts
Even with common parts, RFQs are required for changes in usage. I am not going to give away where I work or what I do, but TRUST me, I would know about it if there were the need for new quotes.

To be honest, Honda has bigger fish to fry at the moment with the major damage done to their Tochigi R&D facility than developing a hot CRZ to come out in less than a year. Remember, Suzuka has been shut down now for 2 weeks, soon to be 3, and I would be suprised if they get moving again at full capacity before mid-April or later. There are some Tier 2/3+ suppliers that have taken serious damage and part sourcing is a problem.

The fact that Honda will be moving some of their R&D resources to Suzuka is a sign, but there is not enough time left in this year for all the events that are required to get a CR-Z Si/Type R or whatever they will badge it as out within the 12M development cycle.
 

· Premium Member
Joined
·
3,097 Posts
Trust me when I say this, but we will not see any change to the current CR-Z platform until at least 2013. There is nothing that I can see that is indicative from Honda that they are activly pursuing parts changes for the 2012 model.

Now, what I may be seeing can change, but it takes lots of time to source new parts, make engineering changes, test the engineering changes and run all of the events that lead up to production start. The CR-Z is on a 2 year development cycle as it is, so just hold your horses on speculation.

The first official thing we will see from Honda will be at the Tokyo Motor Show in December.
Even with common parts, RFQs are required for changes in usage. I am not going to give away where I work or what I do, but TRUST me, I would know about it if there were the need for new quotes.

To be honest, Honda has bigger fish to fry at the moment with the major damage done to their Tochigi R&D facility than developing a hot CRZ to come out in less than a year. Remember, Suzuka has been shut down now for 2 weeks, soon to be 3, and I would be suprised if they get moving again at full capacity before mid-April or later. There are some Tier 2/3+ suppliers that have taken serious damage and part sourcing is a problem.

The fact that Honda will be moving some of their R&D resources to Suzuka is a sign, but there is not enough time left in this year for all the events that are required to get a CR-Z Si/Type R or whatever they will badge it as out within the 12M development cycle.
I agree with you but not because of design time but because of the earthquake. Somewhere on this website there is a link (there is so many I can't remember where and I don't have the time to look for it) with a Honda engineer that a souped up version was on the fast track to be developed by October. I do believe that is now delayed because of the earthquake.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
669 Posts
I agree with you but not because of design time but because of the earthquake. Somewhere on this website there is a link (there is so many I can't remember where and I don't have the time to look for it) with a Honda engineer that a souped up version was on the fast track to be developed by October. I do believe that is now delayed because of the earthquake.
I think I read that the R&D center was among the most directly impacted by the earthquake and that the work there would be moved elsewhere. Not sure where I saw that though.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
58 Posts
I think I read that the R&D center was among the most directly impacted by the earthquake and that the work there would be moved elsewhere. Not sure where I saw that though.
It is posted on the Honda website actually.

Generally speaking, the quote phase of any new or mid model vehicle is planned years ahead of MP start. I am working on 13/14m projects at the moment. My company makes very important safety components for all Honda vehicles, and I have access to info about new models years ahead of the general public. I can tell you this much, I have yet to see any RFQs or drawings for any changes coming on the 2012 model other than colors and releases elsewhere around the globe. If there was going to be a 2012 CR-Z Si/Type R/Etc, I would have seen an RFQ/Drawing issued to my company's Japan headquarters already.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
249 Posts
The interesting thing about that article is...
This is the part that sticks out to me, in a bad way
Admitting that “it will not be acceptable” for the next-generation car to be less efficient than the current model...

I just get this sinking feeling that this so called HOT CR-Z is going to end up only slightly lukewarm. It sounds to me like the goal is not going to be making a more powerful version, the goal is going to be we'll have to live with what little power increase they can achieve and still meet the existing mpg rating.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
282 Posts
I just get this sinking feeling that this so called HOT CR-Z is going to end up only slightly lukewarm. It sounds to me like the goal is not going to be making a more powerful version, the goal is going to be we'll have to live with what little power increase they can achieve and still meet the existing mpg rating.
Is that necessarily such a bad thing? I guess I'm just not all that dissatisfied with the power of the current car. There are times when it seems a bit sluggish but for me that is more than compensated by the much better than anticipated mpgs I've managed to get. And in Sport with 6mt the overall handling of the car with still very decent mileage keeps me very happy.

 

· Registered
Joined
·
249 Posts
Is that necessarily such a bad thing?
For me?
Yes, it's a horrible thing.
I'm lusting over a hot hatch, and have been for years.
I want a new fire breathing 3-door that can take over summer daily driver status.
Notice the vehicles I have listed in my sig.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
669 Posts
This is the part that sticks out to me, in a bad way
Admitting that “it will not be acceptable” for the next-generation car to be less efficient than the current model...

I just get this sinking feeling that this so called HOT CR-Z is going to end up only slightly lukewarm. It sounds to me like the goal is not going to be making a more powerful version, the goal is going to be we'll have to live with what little power increase they can achieve and still meet the existing mpg rating.
HOT being a relative term. For some folks, a Civic Si isn't 'hot' enough and they need a WRX. For another guy, the WRX isn't 'hot' enough and he needs an STi. For another guy, the STi isn't enough and he needs a Vette. I think that we could safely assume that a 'hotter' CR-Z will be designed to be 'hot' relative to it's 'sporty hybrid' competition and maybe the gas only competition in a similar price range.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
1 Posts
Meh.. well I agree that buying into a first year run isn't the greatest idea. I did though and I don't regret it... if I drive it 200k miles and gas stays the same it saves me 10,000 dollars in gas savings...
My only complaint really is the major blindspot formed by a bar on the hatch in the rear. it's like, the biggest blind spot ever
 
41 - 55 of 55 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