Honda CR-Z Hybrid Car Forums banner
1 - 20 of 30 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,221 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
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
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
120 Posts
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 :p
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
693 Posts
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.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
120 Posts
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 :sadwavey: to the Fit.

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

·
Registered
Joined
·
693 Posts
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 :sadwavey: 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.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
120 Posts
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. ??
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,333 Posts
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...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
693 Posts
Can the CR-Z hit sixty in second gear? I don't think it can... If not adding a second gear change takes adds a half second or so for the shift...
That is correct, the CRZ 2nd gear tops out at 57 MPH, but for reference the Honda fit 2nd gear tops out at 54 MPH and the fit hits 60 in 8.3 seconds.

The CRZ's first 3 gears are actually a little bit (10%) higher (or longer) than the Honda fit. This would be consistent with slightly slower 0-60 until you consider the torque advantage of the CRZ, which you would think should overcome its taller gearing. However, after the 1-2 shift at redline, the RPMs of the CRZ are going to always be above 3750 rpm and at this engine speed the additional torque from the IMA is probably reduced quite a bit.

The RPMs on a 1/4 mile run shifting at the CRZ's 6300 redline would look like this:
First gear 1000-6300 rpm shift at 34 MPH
Second gear 3750-6300 rpm shift at 57 mph
Third gear 4326-6300 rpm 83 mph end of quarter-mile right at redline of 3rd gear.

So by the time you hit 21 mph in first gear you never again are in the high torque portion of the CRX's powerband.

Thinking about this, plus the fact that the CRZ has a 500 rpm lower redline than the fit, it does start to make sense that the CRZ would be slower than the fit in a 0-60 sprint, but in everyday driving when you are tooling around at 2000-25000 rpm and just punch it, the CRZ is going to have more initial torque so it is going to feel faster than the fit. But in a drag race the fit is going to win as soon as the RPMs get high.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,333 Posts
good points TCroly... not to mention the CR-Z drops in hp after 5900rpms, so taking it to the limit might actually be hurting the acceleration a bit... i know the CVT shifts way b4 the limiter...

taking it to the limit on my Si was justified not only b/c the power didn't drop after 7900rpms but if you shift too early, on that car, you fall out of vtec and your time gets killed horribly... the CR-Z doesn't have that vtec kick, so it's safe to say that you don't have to worry about falling out of vtec...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
34 Posts
If we had a graph of torque to the wheels in each gear we could figure out the optimal shift points. You want to shift as soon as the torque curve starts to drop below the torque curve of the next gear. (Assumming that happens before redline) Given the amount of torque IMA gives us that may be a bit lower than "normal".
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,071 Posts
That is correct, the CRZ 2nd gear tops out at 57 MPH, but for reference the Honda fit 2nd gear ...
Here is some information from temple of vtec
The Temple of VTEC - Honda and Acura Enthusiasts Online Forums > CR-Z > > CR-Z gearing analysis - graphic

Here are the final gear ratios of JDM MT CR-Z, JDM MT Fit RS 1.5L, and USM 1.5L MT Fit [already multiplied by the final drive; hope I didn't make any mistakes because I based all my reasoning bellow on these numbers... :) :) ]:

1st: 12,92 | 14,86 | 15,28
2nd: 7,683 | 8,025 | 8,639
3rd: 5,357 | 5,595 | 6,020
4th: 4,333 | 4,526 | 4,384
5th: 3,507 | 3,663 | 3,359
6th: 2,828

Compared with the JDM Fit RS
- You can see that the CR-Z uses a bit longer ratios from 1 to 5. As a matter of fact, gear plates from 2 to 5 are identical (which should help saving costs), and the difference arises exclusively from the final drive, which is a bit longer on the Z.
- The first gear though is considerably longer on the Z, making the 1st to 2nd jump a shorter one, which will be appreciated by many. Of course, this approach makes sense if you consider the Z has extra torque to move the car, and doesn't need to use excesivelly short gearing (specially in first) to make the car feel peppier.

On the US Fit
- You can tell Honda was desperate to make it feel faster than it is (fearing US people prejudices about small cars with small engines).
- The result is incredibly short gears from 1 to 3, which means gear spacing is huge because at the end they need to deliver in terms of fuel economy on the highway (small cars are supposed to be "efficient" after all ...). Indeed, even though 1st gear is shortest of the 3, 5th gear is also longest of them all !!
- Basically, pretty nice setup to ensure good highway FE and good stop&go acceleration. That isn't though what someone would seek on a car designed to be driven for fun (on the twists), where close ratios help maximzing fun and speed around corners (and simply shifting for the fun of it !!!), specially on not so strong engines like these ones.

Summing up on the CR-Z
In the end, the CR-Z:
- has longest 1st gear and shortest 5th one, which means they are really close together in order to maximize fun.
- it adds to those 5 a "relaxed 6th" (way longer than the 5th gear on the MT Fits, but still a bit short on the 5th on the 5AT US Fit), that should for sure improve cruising FE: after all, it's a hybrid.
- The longer first gears should also improve city milleage, and the Z should be able to afford them without feeling slow off the line because it has the backup torque of IMA.

Certainly, one is meant to be "forced" to use the stick on the CR-Z, which is why it seems Honda paid special attention to its feel. Shifter throws are supposed to be as short as on the JDM Civic Type R, with even shorter (S2000-like) lateral spacement on the gear selection grid.

- You can see the huge gearing difference between unrevy but torquey diesels and gas NA engines (R18 and 2.2D make same max power).
- CR-Z 1st gear is turbo diesel like (thanks to IMA boost), and 6th is tallest of all gas NA engines, yet not as tall as the TD engine allows.
- CR-Z 5th gear is similar to most L-series, but it adds a 6th on top of it. As I said somewhere else, an even taller 6th would force you to downshift at the slightest uphill on a highway with such little torque as the L15 can provide.
- US and JDM 1.5L Fit have an incredibly short gearing, the US version getting shorter on the first ones (to make 0-62 hungry US people happy) while the JDM 1.5L Fit gets shorter on the last ones.
- US 1.5L Fit covers the same gear span as EU 1.2L Fit, but transitions are completely different.
- EU 1.3 iShift is essentially a 1.3L MT with a shorter 1st gear and an added 6th (it gets noticeably better FE in real life).
- JPs 1.5L Fit has same 2-5 gearing as the Euro R18 Civic; but the Civic adds a 6th on top of that.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fit RS will get a new 6MT for MMC. With an extra gear to play with, I wonder if Honda will make 1st, 2nd and 3rd gears more aggressive. Making that new Fit RS even more faster than CR-Z.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,071 Posts
the CR-Z doesn't have that vtec kick, so it's safe to say that you don't have to worry about falling out of vtec...
Honda Media Newsroom - CR-Z - 2011 Honda CR-Z: Powertrain
"Above approximately 2,300 RPM, a hydraulically actuated spool valve causes a locking pin to engage the secondary rocker arm with the primary one, transitioning the secondary valve into a long-duration mode that increases the volume of air/fuel mixture moving into the combustion chamber. The additional air/fuel mixture helps increase power at high RPM."

Yup, for "falling out of vtec" you have to let engine reaches below 2300rpm.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
159 Posts
Honda Media Newsroom - CR-Z - 2011 Honda CR-Z: Powertrain
"Above approximately 2,300 RPM, a hydraulically actuated spool valve causes a locking pin to engage the secondary rocker arm with the primary one, transitioning the secondary valve into a long-duration mode that increases the volume of air/fuel mixture moving into the combustion chamber. The additional air/fuel mixture helps increase power at high RPM."

Yup, for "falling out of vtec" you have to let engine reaches below 2300rpm.
Thanks. Would you please define what "falling out of vtec" means in lay terms?
 
1 - 20 of 30 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