The only thing I have heard is 0-60 in around or just under 9 seconds.
Interesting you bring this up, because I was looking at Mini's website last night for those figures. Check this out (BTW, this is all USA Spec):Was a bit disapointed at first, but for a 122 PS car that has to carry some hybrid gear its not that bad. Eg. a Mini Cooper with 120 HP needs 9,3 to 100 km/h (real test figure with a car that has some equipment such as A/C) and does 28 mpg.
Then there is the question if the 9,7s figure is for the CVT or the MT car and even if it is for the MT car, the 0-100 is only a very rough performance indicator. I'd really like to know the gearing and final drive of the MT...
Let's hope so - I am trying very hard not to judge the car based just on specs until I can get out there and test drive oneAnother Predicion:
When you test drive this car in Sport Mode you will forget about 0-60 becuase you will be grinning due to your 128tq @ 1000rpm and the Civic-SI-like Handling.
I was extremely disappointed when I saw the final specs yesterday, but the more I look at all the information (official and unofficial), the more encouraged I am.Let's hope so - I am trying very hard not to judge the car based just on specs until I can get out there and test drive one
I was quite interested in the CR-Z as a downsize replacement for my 2004 Accord Coupe V6MT (0-60 in low 6s) but I'm dismayed at the performance. The definitive Sports Car is probably the Mazda Miata with 0-60 in the 7.0 to 8.0 range. I don't think the CR-Z can be called a Sports Car when most Mini-Vans and SUVs on the road could beat it in normal traffic, and probably on a twisty road! I'll wait to drive it and hope I'm wrong, but the Toyota FT-86 is looking more like the probable replacement for me.Well if the JDM brochure is correct looks like the 0-60 MPH time will be in at 9.7 secs.
Did Honda make or break your sale, or do you even mind what the 0-60 time is?
What got me interested was that Honda called the CR-Z a "Sports Car". That's what I'm looking for and unfortunately the performance numbers do not appear to be in what I think is Sports Car territory (8 secs or less to 60). So it may be on to a Toyota but I'll certainly drive the CR-Z first. The EvoX doesn't fit my definition of a Sports Car either - two doors , two seats only!why do i always read that they're gonna pass on this CR-Z and wait for the FT-86 when that car is supposed to be in the $30k+ range???
i mean it's not even in the same class/league as the CR-Z... that's like me saying "i'm gonna pass on the CR-Z and just get EvoX"