Honda Insight + Hybrid Chatter: What the CR-Z should have been all along - Post 288

  • Thread starter Thread starter Philly
  • 450 comments
  • 44,676 views
You do bring a good point about the current engines. I guess Atkinson just needs development to make them on par with otto engines when it comes to grunt. No doubt Honda can do that with clever ignition timing and ECUs.

I think the CR-Z would be well-served to have an SI model. Just don't understand why Honda won't.
 
My best guess is engineering. It's on the same platform as the Fit and Insight, and is unlikely to have been developed to take a larger engine. I know people have put larger engines in them, but then the second problem is finding an appropriate engine in the current range. A K20 is all well and good but it's now an obsolete engine... and what else do Honda really have which might fit in an Si model?...
 
Im not sure how the k20 is obsolete, infact I think its still a viable option for people who want an NA that isnt old like the b series.
 
Kent
Im not sure how the k20 is obsolete, infact I think its still a viable option for people who want an NA that isnt old like the b series.
Click to expand...

It's not obsolete from an aftermarket perspective, it's obsolete from a mass-production perspective in an age where power isn't the only requirement of an engine. The K20 was killed off due to emissions regs.
 
Well Honda should at least reveal something new when the 2014 NSX drops on the market, and along with it the top tier performance car trickle down of tech to the rest of the line up.
 
NissanSkylineN1
kers?
Click to expand...

In a way, but not technically the same as F1.

It's just like an "overboost" function. The electric motor is normally set at a safe output level to preserve battery charge. The S+ button allows the motor to reach a higher output, but presumably drains charge at quite a rate, so it's kept for only brief bursts. That way it's there when you need it, and not draining the juice when you don't.
 
That is interesting. What's even more interesting is the first picture in the comments section:

ku-xlarge.jpg


Now that is interesting.

The other day I saw a CRZ on the road and it reminded me that they existed. Next, please.
 
Space should not be an issue. But considering the CR-Z is built on a Fit floorpan, it's more than slightly disappointing that there's just enough space in the rear seat to fit a six year old, at the risk of cutting off all circulation to their legs.

But since 'Murica gets the infinitely more useful parcel shelf, that's less of an issue.

Still, Honda could and should redesign the battery pack, free up the rear seat space that it eats into, sling it lower in the body and make it lighter. Mind-boggling that they have it stacked vertically when there's no fuel tank under the rear seat to compete for space with.
 
Leonidae@MFT
And I still can't fathom why US dislikes 3-door hatches. :irked:
Click to expand...
Because people like my wife think you can't fit a child seat in them, despite the fact that if we ride in someone else's car we take my car seat because it is easier to get in and out.
 
Having tried to fit a child seat in the back of a CR-Z, I can safely say it's possible, but you'll have to sit pretty upright in front.
 
niky
Having tried to fit a child seat in the back of a CR-Z, I can safely say it's possible, but you'll have to sit pretty upright in front.
Click to expand...
Which, ironically, is how it is in my wife's 4-door Yaris. There seems to be some false connection in some minds that less doors = less space.
 
Depends on the year of Yaris. Maybe if we're talking a 90's Yaris, it's almost as small, but anything newer has much more headroom, legroom and elbowroom than the CR-Z.

Heck, the Mirage has more space in the back seat.

Double-heck, the Suzuki Alto, a Kei car, has more rear seat space than the CR-Z.

If you want a three-door, the Veloster is much better packaged. Okay, so it's three-and-a-half, but it still counts.
 
sumbrownkid
You do bring a good point about the current engines. I guess Atkinson just needs development to make them on par with otto engines when it comes to grunt. No doubt Honda can do that with clever ignition timing and ECUs.

I think the CR-Z would be well-served to have an SI model. Just don't understand why Honda won't.
Click to expand...

Or, you know, you can just slap a real electric motor on there for all the grunt work. i-MMD, ladies and gentlemen:



EARSTH DOREEMS TECHNOROGEE DESU!
 
Keef
That is interesting. What's even more interesting is the first picture in the comments section:

Now that is interesting.

The other day I saw a CRZ on the road and it reminded me that they existed. Next, please.
Click to expand...
I'm in two minds, having driven both the CR-Z and the Fiesta ST, albeit on different roads.

The Fiesta is an absolute riot on glassy smooth roads, though @Famine leads me to believe it's a bit less fun when you throw a few bumps into the mix. It has a great engine though and it's undoubtedly good value.

The CR-Z is nowhere near as quick, but I still maintain it doesn't feel properly slow either - its performance is on-par with an NA Miata, and it works well on the same sort of roads. The engine and gearbox combo is also a little nicer to use too, because it's more of an old-school revver than the turbo'd Fiesta's low-down surge of power, and the gearbox on the Honda is much nicer, just like all Hondas.

Purely subjectively, I prefer the way the Honda looks too. I've never liked this generation Fiesta, and improved though it is over the normal ones it's still a really incohesive shape. And it still has a nasty interior, Recaros aside - the Honda feels better built and much more interesting.

On balance, the Fiesta is the better performance car. But in the UK at least where gas is more expensive (I got 50 mpg UK after a week with the Honda - I'd be surprised if the Fiesta got much more than 40 mpg UK doing the same journeys) and you can't make as much use of the Ford's power advantage, I'd actually prefer the Honda. And that just applies to a stock one. Stick a supercharger on a used CR-Z and the performance/price gap would shrink too.
 
niky
Depends on the year of Yaris. Maybe if we're talking a 90's Yaris, it's almost as small, but anything newer has much more headroom, legroom and elbowroom than the CR-Z.

Heck, the Mirage has more space in the back seat.

Double-heck, the Suzuki Alto, a Kei car, has more rear seat space than the CR-Z.

If you want a three-door, the Veloster is much better packaged. Okay, so it's three-and-a-half, but it still counts.
Click to expand...
The Yaris is fine for its class, but compared to my Golf (Rabbit) the child's eat issue is a pain. My wife sees two doors and assumes the Golf is smaller. But truth is, a 2-door will have seats that slide up very far, very easily.

I always use my wife's car opinions as a barometer for mass public. She likes large family carriers and cute cars. And a Toyota can come equipped with bombs in the gas tank and they would still be the best cars on the road.
 
homeforsummer
Stick a supercharger on a used CR-Z and the performance/price gap would shrink too.
Click to expand...

Never a fair comparison.

I'm quite curious as to what everyone else gets in terms of CR-Zs. Ours are all fitted with 17" PS3 tires, which, in road use, is like doing A-Spec in Gran Turismo wearing Racing Softs. A CR-Z with a stick and these tires is an absolute blast down any piece of road you can think of, despite the extra weight over the Fit... and the engine revs deliciously, and has just enough grunt.

At least until the batteries run out.

We just finished our technical tests. There's a second's worth of difference in acceleration pace to 100 km/h between a full battery and an empty one, and another two second's worth if you use "Sport+". (Yeah, it doesn't feel like it works, but it works).

So, empty battery = performance on par with a 1.3 liter motor. Full battery = performance on par with a 1.5. Spamming the "Sport+" button = performance on par with a 1.8. What I'd like for Honda to do is to simply enable "Sport+" as a stand-alone mode. Make it so that the extra boost comes in at full throttle and spare people the gimmicky need to press a button.

FoolKiller
I always use my wife's car opinions as a barometer for mass public.
Click to expand...

Wonder what she thinks of the Paceman, then...
 
niky
Never a fair comparison.
Click to expand...
Obviously, but ST and CR-Z isn't a great comparison in the first place - they appeal to different buyers really. I expect the hybrid aspect of the CR-Z does angle it slightly differently from the average hot hatch.
I'm quite curious as to what everyone else gets in terms of CR-Zs. Ours are all fitted with 17" PS3 tires, which, in road use, is like doing A-Spec in Gran Turismo wearing Racing Softs. A CR-Z with a stick and these tires is an absolute blast down any piece of road you can think of, despite the extra weight over the Fit... and the engine revs deliciously, and has just enough grunt.
Click to expand...
The one I had in for a week was on 16" wheels with whatever tyres they come with. Nothing special, to my knowledge. Was still fun and didn't ride too badly either. Certainly don't think they were uber-sticky things.

I never quite wore down the battery while I was using it. Is the performance that bad without it? Even without assistance it's supposed to be ~110hp or so, which sounds like a fairly healthy 1.3. The biggest benefit of the electric motor for me was the low-down torque. It actually feels quite responsive from pretty low revs, which certainly isn't what you'd expect from a low-ish capacity 1.5.

Incidentally, I never really used the Sport+ button. Shift down a couple of gears and floor it and you basically get full power anyway - all S+ does is gives you more torque at lower revs. By the time you're touching the limiter the button becomes largely irrelevant.
 
I think it's a testament to the drivetrain programming that you don't particularly feel the need to use S+. I actually thought it was useless, myself. But the clock doesnt' lie. Eleven and a half seconds to 100 km/h without. Nine and a half with.
It really does help on the run up through the gears, minimizing the loss of torque when upshifting.
 
I only remembered the car had it about 30 minutes before the delivery guy came to collect it again :lol: Went for a quick drive and pressed it as much as possible.

I can see the only real time you'd need it is if you see a passing opportunity and weren't on the ball enough to have changed down first. It does give a useful mid-range boost. I was quite impressed by the Sport/Normal/Eco modes too - they do actually seem to make a difference. Eco was crap though even by my standards - actually makes pulling away on hills quite difficult it gives you so little power!

For me the CR-Z's biggest problem was that I just couldn't get comfortable in it. It's the one thing that'd really make me think twice about buying one as I'd almost immediately have to spend another few hundred quid on a Recaro seat or something!

Here are my CR-Z and Fiesta ST reviews, incidentally. The Fiesta is the objectively better car, but I personally prefer the CR-Z.
 
I liked the seat shape... I find most lumbar supports too aggressive for my weight, and I didn't mind the knee support, since I sit very low. The seat felt very supportive for my Asian frame. Or it should have felt so, if it weren't so flexible. It kept twisting when I leaned into it in turns. Yes. Recaros would be nice.

If we're pimping reviews:
http://www.topgear.com.ph/drives/review-honda-cr-z-1-5-mugen-edition-cvt
honda-crz-philippines-review-01.jpg

honda-crz-philippines-review-05.jpg

honda-crz-philippines-review-07.jpg


Happy when my brother can do photos. Takes a load off, for me, and I get them for the cost of lending him the car and some gas. (Web still doesn't pay a lot, either).

Wish we didn't have the 100 word per section restriction. Too... restrictive. But it's a good challenge writing to a limit.

 
Agreed. I have some of the most fun writing to a 300-or-so-word-total in quick drive reviews. Makes you really think about how to get the information across.

Interesting reading your thoughts on it. Not sure the CVT appeals even though I don't mind it in the Insight - it's just not that sort of car. One of the best manuals I've used so it'd be a shame to opt for the auto.

It kinda frustrates me how Honda made nothing like this in between the original Insight and the CR-Z. It might have taken some of the sting off early Insight prices and brought them within my budget :lol: As it is they're rare as rocking-horse dung and usually have strong prices. And the CR-Z is too new for me to afford.
 
This guy is the most salesmanish salesman I've ever seen:



THE TURNING RADIUS IS IMMENSE!

Really excited for Honda's new hybrid tech. Apparently the new hybrid Fit is the most popular vehicle in Japan now.
 
The Insight appears to be going for another drastic visual overhaul for the third generation. From a compact coupe, to a Prius clone, to this saloon with a more conventional appearance:
2019-honda-insight-prototype.jpg

2019-honda-insight-prototype.jpg

2019-honda-insight-prototype.jpg


Only a concept for now but the production model will look virtually identical to the model shown above.
 
If anyone really is serious about "bigger" and "more power" while being a hybrid and not spending over $40k, just get the Fusion Hybrid. 180+hp, >44mpg highway (a real practical average through all seasons), lots of space.
 

Latest Posts

Back