[MikeCR-Z]

JDM Honda CR-Z Brochure Hits the Web: Claims 0 to 62 MPH in 9.7 Sec

The monks at Temple of VTEC have uncovered what appears to be the official brochure for the Japan-spec Honda CR-Z. Our Kanji is a bit rusty, so here's what we can pick out.

The pictures say the CR-Z hits 62 mph in 9.7 seconds, which isn't too much of a surprise considering an electric-assisted 1.5L provides propulsion (the CRX wasn't a hot-rod, either). The brochure offers a pair of power figures. We assume the 113-hp at 6000 rpm 107 lb-ft at 4800 rpm is the gasoline engine, while the 13-hp at 1500 rpm and 57 lb-ft at 1000 rpm comes from the electric assist.

The fuel mileage claims translate to around 55 mpg, but Japan measures mpg with a different standard in Japan. You can expect the U.S. version's numbers to settle a little under the Insight's combined 41 mpg, as the CR-Z has a little more displacement.

Honda has said that the CR-Z will enter world markets by the end of 2010.

More pictures below.

Please post comments, reactions and discussion here.

Link to article here courtesy of Temple of Vtec
Picture found at Motortrend courtesy of Temple of Vtec

 

[MikeCR-Z]

Pictures found at: Motortrend courtesy of Temple of Vtec

 

[MikeCR-Z]

Pictures found at: Motortrend courtesy of Temple of Vtec

 

[MikeCR-Z]

Please post comments, reactions and discussion here.

 

[oldchap14]

U.S. vs Japanese Spec Engines

Most of the credible CR-Z sources I have seen say the U.S. spec engine will be a 1.5L vs Japan's 1.3L. That's about a 15% difference in displacement. Consevatively, that should translate to about 125 hp for the U.S. spec engine, but I'm guessing about 130, which coincides with most of the rumors.

The Japanese color pallet is encouraging, with white, silver, red and metallic orange.

The interior does not look nearly as futuristic as the concepts, but the photos are very limiting in this regard, so I guess we'll have to wait until Detroit for the real deal.

Thanks for posting the sales brochure. Yes, it feels like we're finally getting close to reality.

 

[Phinman]

No Yellow? Maybe for US?

 

[CR-Z Insight]

The interior looks nice and clean. like most Honda products. The displacement numbers are a bit weak, but if we get a 1.5 that may help. It looks like the production car (Silver car in the brochure) is missing the dual tip exhaust, which I was hoping would make it to market. I can't really tell what the interior trunk space looks like.

It is amazing to me how Honda can keep cars like the CR-Z secret for so long. Other car manufactures tend to leak info just for some free publicity. Honda has always done a very good job of marketing cars, which helps retain resale values.:grin:

 

[G2244]

Still seems odd to me that they are appearing to make this a 2 seater, yet it is so close in length to many 4 seaters. The brochure indicates the CR-Z is 4080mm long. The US Spec VW Golf 2 door is 4201mm. So if my math is correct the CR-Z is only about 4.75" shorter. Anyone esle think this is odd?

 

[Goose]

We may get yellow. An interesting aspect to yellow and Japanese cars:

Yellow is considered the "color of death" in Japan. It has been speculated that because of this negative connotation, yellow isn't popular in the home market. I realize that we don't have a similar aversion over here to black.

Weather or not this story/explaination is true is anyone's guess. Just thought it would be of interest.

 

[MikeCR-Z]

It does seem odd that it still is only a 2 seater, seems to be a lot of room from those back passenger windows to the trunk line.

Is it just me or does it look like the first picture is showing off some HID's on the CR-Z?

 

[MikeCR-Z]

Another leaked image, this time of the possible Mugen Honda CR-Z!!!

Gotta love those days when you don't expect anything and then there is a ton of info released

 

[crz2luv]

I think they are HIDs!!!!

 

[GoHuskies]

My purchase of this car is now engine dependent.

Insight drivetrain in a 2 seater is a no. If the 1.5L comes we'll talk.

 

[ohionab]

If you look at the pics you can see this brochure is for the 1.5L engine. So, that means the 9.7 second time is for the 1.5L CRZ. I dont see anything in any of the pictures that mention a 1.3L.

Personally, I was very excited when i first learned about the CRZ, but the more I learn about the official specs the more I am becoming dissapointed. When I first heard about this car I guess I thought it would be a PERFORMANCE hybrid. I thought it would have ~8 second 0-60 time, and being a hybrid get something like ~40 in town and ~37 highway. Instead it seems that they are going for a HYBRID performance car. In otherwords you can beat the crap out of any Prius or Insight that wants to try to race you, but as soon as a stock base model Civic rolls up, or a base stock Mazda 3 well.... then the CRZ is done for. I just dont like the fact that they are trying to market it as a "performance" car when a little, cheap, bottom rung Civic can beat the pants off of it (if I remember correctly base Civics have ~8.5 second 0-60).

I see the CRZ as being a tiny baby step in the right direction, but not the adult step that i was hoping for. I like the design a lot, I like the idea a lot, but the performance looks like it will be lack-luster at the very best. Because of these latest numbers I highly doubt that I will be purchasing one now.

 

[Blake]

Don't write the CR-Z off on performance alone

I see the CRZ as being a tiny baby step in the right direction, but not the adult step that i was hoping for. I like the design a lot, I like the idea a lot, but the performance looks like it will be lack-luster at the very best. Because of these latest numbers I highly doubt that I will be purchasing one now.

Well we can keep hoping for the best for the North American version, maybe Honda can sneak out some more horsepower or Mugen will offer some good performance parts. I'm still haven't written the CR-Z off yet for its performance specs (short comings)

 

[rd118403]

I agree with OHIONAB. If the 1.5l hybrid is the only choice, then Honda missed the point of their own car. This car is supposed to be a modern day CRX. The original CRX was known for level of fun found in the SI, and the fuel economy found in the DX (and especially in the HF).

If they only release one version with a 0-62 of 9.7s, then Honda will miss the mark for 50% of this car's audience.

*A compact 2-seater that goes 0-62 in 9.7s and gets 40mpg with an auto/manual option is a 1988-1991 CRX DX.* The USA market needs an SI besides the Civic. In fact, the CRZ SI (if we get one) needs to slightly exceed the Civic SI performance numbers, otherwise a lot of people will opt for the more practical SI Sedan.

 

[TCroly]

FWIW My 2009 Honda fit is EPA rated at 27/33 but after a year of ownership I have averaged 36 mpg with my lowest tankful being 33 and my best 39. And I live on an island with no freeways. All this driving is city/suburban driving with the AC on and less than 10 miles at a time. Point being, that even if the EPA rates the CRZ at 35 to 40 mpg, I fully expect that I will be able to get 45 to 50 mpg.

The CRZ will have a similar power plant to my fit with a 6 speed, instead of 5 speed, tranny. Performance will be similar to my fit and that is OK by me, as long as the hybrid bits manage to get me 35% better gas mileage than my fit gets. Otherwise I would rather have a non hybrid that should weigh 175 to 200 pounds less than the hybrid. The lower weight would benefit handling as well as acceleration.

I guess for me, my ideal real world CRZ would weigh 2250 pounds, have 140 hp non-hybrid engine, get 36 mpg and go 0-60 in 7.5 seconds.

But my best guess for the real thing, in the real world, is that it will be 2750 pounds, 114 hp =+14 hp electric motor, get 45 mpg and 0-60 in 9.2 seconds.

 

[rd118403]

I guess for me, my ideal real world CRZ would weigh 2250 pounds, have 140 hp non-hybrid engine, get 36 mpg and go 0-60 in 7.5 seconds.

But my best guess for the real thing, in the real world, is that it will be 2750 pounds, 114 hp =+14 hp electric motor, get 45 mpg and 0-60 in 9.2 seconds.

I have to agree with you 100% on all of that. If I recall correctly, my 1991 CRX si weighed about 2200 lbs, had 108 hp, and did 0-60 in 8.5 sec (all very similar to your "ideal real world CRZ"). Unfortunately, to keep up with modern safety standards we won't be able to enjoy that anymore; however, as I have stated in most of my posts, Honda has a chance to get the performance and handling very close or better on this new CRZ

 

[MikeCR-Z]

I still would like to see a CR-Z come in with a 0-60 MPH time under 9.0 seconds, but it does seem less and less likely to happen as we get sooner to the release.

 

[MikeCR-Z]

Some new interior pics located in this thread as well: http://www.crzforum.com/forum/honda-crz-pictures-videos/200-new-pics.html#post1299