xBeastx
 |
|
|
Would non-hybrid variants of the Honda CR-Z sell well or even better than it currently does? I'm not sure exactly how the pricing works, but I'm pretty sure removing all the Hybrid tech could lower the price quite a lot from its current base price of $19,695. There could be a regular EX trim with a 1.5L CVT or 6MT, the hybrid with its current powertrain, and then an Si with a 2.0L 6MT. Just a thought...
|
S600=Dream
|
|
I'd be tempted to buy your supposed "EX". The Fit's drivetrain is just fine, and if the thing weighed less it'd be about perfect. As is, it's a really, really great car that's saddled with just a little too much weight.
That said, the split personality thing they've done with it really is clever, and I like it a lot the way it is.
I'd rather they do nothing to the drivetrain and just make it lighter somehow.
|
garoto628
|
|
xAbSoLuTexZeRo wrote:
Would non-hybrid variants of the Honda CR-Z sell well or even better than it currently does? I'm not sure exactly how the pricing works, but I'm pretty sure removing all the Hybrid tech could lower the price quite a lot from its current base price of $19,695. There could be a regular EX trim with a 1.5L CVT or 6MT, the hybrid with its current powertrain, and then an Si with a 2.0L 6MT. Just a thought...
|
I would buy the Si yesterday.
[Put a "Honda, shut up and take my money" funny image here]
|
FiSH-Chan
|
|
S600=Dream wrote:
I'd rather they do nothing to the drivetrain and just make it lighter somehow.
|
I would be quite interested in a CR-Z the way it is right now if I can get one. Lighter would be good as well. Been seeing alot of this on the roads, a black one with black rims, which looked awesome. Perfect size & good road presence.
That said, I would like to see a bit moar power, like something that is in a Type R. Go back into the liter/100hp 1.5 150HP (whether combined with the electric hp or not) is a good figure to start with....
|
sadlerau
|
|
Modern Motor magazine here in Australia has a "bang for your buck" comparison with 18 vehicles across several classes.
The CR-Z finished stone, motherless last, even after they heaped praise on it's handling/ride compromise, easily adjustable chassis and economy. But it's STEEP entry price and the fact the batteries gave up the the ability to add to acceleration after the second corner put it behind even the Hyundai Veloster. :(
The Polo GTi won, the testers citing the easily adjustable chassis, good handling/ride compromise and punchy turbo motor!
Funny that, not.
|
iutodd
|
|
|
I don't think the base price needs a lot of lowering - the car is so fundamentally different from anything else Honda offers at the price point that if people want the car then they get it. I also think that sales are incredibly hard to judge now that Honda has admitted that they aren't going to ship the CR-Z over in quantities great enough to really matter.
|
s2ktaxi
|
|
a 1.8 or 2.0L ED engine with a 7 spd DSG with a tall top gear would lower the weight of the car and give it gas mileage similar to the current Hybrid...
I'd get one...
|
ciwai08
|
|
iutodd wrote:
I don't think the base price needs a lot of lowering - the car is so fundamentally different from anything else Honda offers at the price point that if people want the car then they get it. I also think that sales are incredibly hard to judge now that Honda has admitted that they aren't going to ship the CR-Z over in quantities great enough to really matter.
|
I think its been pretty well verified that its not lack of supply that's hampering sales, but lack of demand. I've seen four CRZs on the lot near me for seemingly a couple of months now. Even if an Si, non-hybrid version doubled sales, it would still be under a thousand units a month.
I seriously doubt we'll see a 2nd generation version of the CRZ, which I think is unfortunate. Honda of old made a brilliant sports coupe with the 2nd generation Prelude, burying memories of the first gen that was as dismal a piece as the CRZ, but this Honda's more likely to go running with its tail between its legs.
|
Chocs
|
|
|
By the time CR-Z is up for a second generation, Honda might have a more suitable ED powertrain prepared. Heck, imagine eSH-AWD on that thing.
|
human668
|
|
I think people want a smaller version of Civic Si not necessary a CR-Z Si. Even if a K20/K24 CR-Z Si exists, people still think it's inferior to Civic Si due to lack of independent rear suspension and rear seats. The Civic SI coupe is at $22355 and unless the imaginary CR-Z Si is significantly cheaper, the Civic SI is always the better car to buy. The Fit Sport is at $17060 already. Your imaginary CR-Z regular EX can't be lower than that. Not to mention the imaginary CR-Z Si. I think as long as there's Civic Si, there's no room for CR-Z Si.
The IMA system only weights 80kg, about the weight of a non-obese American male passenger. Ditching it will make the car lighter but it lost a crap ton of instantaneous torque.
http://www.vtec.net/forums/one-message?message_id=933218&article_id=933055
The CR-Z powertrain has similar measured power as a R18 Civic.
http://www.spritmonitor.de/en/detail/429484.html It can return me an average of 37.5mpg. And it handles great on fun twisty road.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WrS3k4vkhLg&feature=youtu.be
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ullQM4uE3Nw&list=FLskjFG6soKL7ZEx7yvbSTPQ&index=50&feature=plpp_video
To me, it's not a bad car at all.
Like the base Mini Cooper coupe, the CR-Z is just so unique and different. For those who want it, it's a spot on great car. For everyone else, it's just not a good buy.
|
garoto628
|
|
human668 wrote:
I think as long as there's Civic Si, there's no room for CR-Z Si
|
Exactly. There's plenty of room right now as you can see.
|
Nick GravesX
|
|
Personally, no. Not when there's a properly-designed real sports car available for A Few Dollars More...
But that doesn't mean a CR-Z Si isn't without its merits and it would probably widen the car's extremely narrow appeal.
|
Chocs
|
|
human668 wrote:
Even if a K20/K24 CR-Z Si exists, people still think it's inferior to Civic Si due to lack of independent rear suspension and rear seats. |
The problem is their product planners...
|
WongKN
|
|
|
You don't have to go so far. The other day I was told by a local race tuner that one US tuner has designed a torsion beam which is split in the middle, allowing the two connected rear wheels to operate independently, much like an IRS. He did not give me anymore details though. Apparently it is a direct replacement for the Jazz (Fit) and I would think they would have one for the CR-Z as well. Perhaps someone like Shawn might have more details.
|
FiSH-Chan
|
|
WongKN wrote:
You don't have to go so far. The other day I was told by a local race tuner that one US tuner has designed a torsion beam which is split in the middle, allowing the two connected rear wheels to operate independently, much like an IRS. He did not give me anymore details though. Apparently it is a direct replacement for the Jazz (Fit) and I would think they would have one for the CR-Z as well. Perhaps someone like Shawn might have more details.
|
Wow! Why is that not news on here? Very interesting to me. I tried to search about it but nothing came up.
|
dootndo2
|
|
I think the back seat issue is a FAIL. Either take it out, or put cushions on it. How can I put my dog back there?
I think I'd like to see them get the CRZ to 60 in 7.5 to 8 seconds. 10+ seconds to 60 is so far out of the ball park. Or, have it return 40+ MPG.
I love the concept of the CRZ. A 6MT is such a great addition.
I would consider one if it had either better economy or more sport. Not trashy big rear spoilers and lowering kits. More oomph.
I also think the CRZ would ge great with a targa top (ala Civic del Sol).
dootndo2
|
Nick GravesX
|
|
FiSH-Chan wrote:
WongKN wrote:
You don't have to go so far. The other day I was told by a local race tuner that one US tuner has designed a torsion beam which is split in the middle, allowing the two connected rear wheels to operate independently, much like an IRS. He did not give me anymore details though. Apparently it is a direct replacement for the Jazz (Fit) and I would think they would have one for the CR-Z as well. Perhaps someone like Shawn might have more details.
|
Wow! Why is that not news on here? Very interesting to me. I tried to search about it but nothing came up.
|
Sounds like the result would be like a nasty old semi-trailing arm arrangement that used to make old German cars so evil. If it's not multi-link, it's most likely retrograde.
|
s2ktaxi
|
|
dootndo2 wrote:
I think the back seat issue is a FAIL. Either take it out, or put cushions on it. How can I put my dog back there?
I think I'd like to see them get the CRZ to 60 in 7.5 to 8 seconds. 10+ seconds to 60 is so far out of the ball park. Or, have it return 40+ MPG.
I love the concept of the CRZ. A 6MT is such a great addition.
I would consider one if it had either better economy or more sport. Not trashy big rear spoilers and lowering kits. More oomph.
I also think the CRZ would ge great with a targa top (ala Civic del Sol).
dootndo2
|
Agree with most points except for maybe the targa top :)
0-60 in 6.5 and upper 30s cty/hwy mpg or 0-60 in 8.0 with mid 40s mpg is what I think it will take to make the CRZ compelling - irrespective of whether it's hybrid or no. This can't be that hard considering the current civic is heavier and already gets mid to upper 30s mpg and 0-60 in 8.5 (give or take)
|
human668
|
|
s2ktaxi wrote:
0-60 in 8.0 with mid 40s mpg is what I think it will take to make the CRZ compelling - irrespective of whether it's hybrid or no. This can't be that hard considering the current civic is heavier and already gets mid to upper 30s mpg and 0-60 in 8.5 (give or take)
|
That can be easily done with 1.5L ED engine or an upgrade battery pack (Lithium-Ion). The CR-Z 6MT can already do 0-60mph in 8.5s and gets upper 30s mpg to low 40s mpg.
|
FiSH-Chan
|
|
human668 wrote:
s2ktaxi wrote:
0-60 in 8.0 with mid 40s mpg is what I think it will take to make the CRZ compelling - irrespective of whether it's hybrid or no. This can't be that hard considering the current civic is heavier and already gets mid to upper 30s mpg and 0-60 in 8.5 (give or take)
|
That can be easily done with 1.5L ED engine or an upgrade battery pack (Lithium-Ion). The CR-Z 6MT can already do 0-60mph in 8.5s and gets upper 30s mpg to low 40s mpg.
|
I know the Civic won't get upper 30mpgs where I am living in my road conditions (at best I could figure out, I saw something like 18USmpg in the same city driving conditions). And I know the CRZ is possible to hit 30mpg in those conditions. That is where the CRZ selling point is.
That said, it can be better, waiting for their update.
|
FiSH-Chan
|
|
Nick Graves wrote:
Sounds like the result would be like a nasty old semi-trailing arm arrangement that used to make old German cars so evil. If it's not multi-link, it's most likely retrograde. |
Not familiar with those, any drawing or illustrations we can rerfer to?
|
Grace141
|
|
FiSH-Chan wrote:
Nick Graves wrote:
Sounds like the result would be like a nasty old semi-trailing arm arrangement that used to make old German cars so evil. If it's not multi-link, it's most likely retrograde. |
Not familiar with those, any drawing or illustrations we can rerfer to?
|
Nick, are you thinking of the old-school Porsche 356/VW Beetle swing axle setup? Yes, that would be pretty awful.
|
Nick GravesX
|
|
Not quite; the semi-trailing arm introduces a degree of 'steer' to counteract the camber change - but it's still in effect a single-pivot link & not a parallelogram arrangement like DW/Multilink & not constant-camber, like a dead axle. Just about every IRS car of the 1960s/70s was semi-trailing and a marginal improvement over swing axles, which were lethal!
A torsion beam is to some extent an improvement on a trailing or even semi-trailing, because as the beam twists, it imposes a camber correction on the trailing links - imitating DW to a degree. The only problem is the dead-axle 'hop' on transverse ridges.
By in effect disconnecting the twist beam, I foresee it reverting to a type of semi-trailing arm; you cure the hop, but lose the 'steer' effect.
Opel improved the TB by adding an old-fashioned Watts-linkage (like a good live axle) to add additional lateral control - with some good effect on the Astra.
|
Nick GravesX
|
|
Nick Graves wrote:
Not quite; the semi-trailing arm introduces a degree of 'steer' to counteract the camber change - but it's still in effect a single-pivot link & not a parallelogram arrangement like DW/Multilink & not constant-camber, like a dead axle. Just about every IRS car of the 1960s/70s was semi-trailing and a marginal improvement over swing axles, which were lethal!
A torsion beam is to some extent an improvement on a trailing or even semi-trailing, because as the beam twists, it imposes a camber correction on the trailing links - imitating DW to a degree. The only problem is the dead-axle 'hop' on transverse ridges.
By in effect disconnecting the twist beam, I foresee it reverting to a type of semi-trailing arm; you cure the hop, but lose the 'steer' effect.
Opel improved the TB by adding an old-fashioned Watts-linkage (like a good live axle) to add additional lateral control - with some good effect on the Astra.
|
|
Nick GravesX
|
|
What you can do (see Poesche 928 or USDM Civic) is to put an additional link into the outer pivots of the latter (the Weissach axle) which produces a 4WS effect under/off load.
I should have thought retro-fitting the Civ axle would be the way to go, personally - if it's not impractical.
|
DeuxCrx
|
|
|
Just return to the semi-trailing arm design used on the 2nd Gen CRX ('88 USDM, & '88-'91 all non-USDM). It had a reputation as being excellent for auto-crossing, providing a passive 4WS effect (which got it dropped in the USDM market because of the weenies whom claimed it felt "odd" or "unsafe").
|
milvtecguy
|
|
dootndo2 wrote:
I think the back seat issue is a FAIL. Either take it out, or put cushions on it. How can I put my dog back there?
I think I'd like to see them get the CRZ to 60 in 7.5 to 8 seconds. 10+ seconds to 60 is so far out of the ball park. Or, have it return 40+ MPG.
I love the concept of the CRZ. A 6MT is such a great addition.
I would consider one if it had either better economy or more sport. Not trashy big rear spoilers and lowering kits. More oomph.
I also think the CRZ would ge great with a targa top (ala Civic del Sol).
dootndo2
|
The whole dog issue would be the only thing keeping me from buying one. I don't care about driving people around, but I need someplace to put the dogs. I think the CR-Z is the best looking Honda since the S2K, it's a shame there is so much potential being wasted.
|
danielgr
|
|
Personally, I wouldn't have bought mine if it was not a hybrid, but I would have bought it anyway if there were "non-hybrid" offerings in the line-up.
That said, I guess there are both people that would only consider it with a high-performance engine under the hood, and also those that wouldn't have bought the hybrid it if it was not instantly recognized as such (i.e. if non-hybrid versions were available).
I guess that this time around those caring about the hybrid part got the ball.
|
DCR
|
|
That portion of the market is miniscule though. Had they used their parts bin capability, Honda could have produced the CR-Z with a hybrid trim, just like the Civic, upcoming Accord, ILX, and Fit (JDM), etc.
Having done that, it would have sold much better...however, as others have pointed out...against a strong Yen, you have to wonder if they made this sell short and limited on purpose. Then, when I start to explore that avenue, I start to think Honda would be insane in that approach.
The CR-Z, for the US, was a very niche idea from the start and honestly, pretty much doomed to do very little for Honda here.
|
Nick GravesX
|
|
DeuxCrx wrote:
Just return to the semi-trailing arm design used on the 2nd Gen CRX ('88 USDM, & '88-'91 all non-USDM). It had a reputation as being excellent for auto-crossing, providing a passive 4WS effect (which got it dropped in the USDM market because of the weenies whom claimed it felt "odd" or "unsafe").
|
The 2nd CRX had the same (call it multilink - or control blade!) as all the greatest Civs:
You can see the 'trick' link at the front that adjusts the toe for 4WS.
To call it semi-trailing is a 'wash yer mouth out!' misnomer!
I think they just dialled in more static toe to dial out the 4WS effect for the tremblies.
|
|
|
| |
![[home]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/home.gif){kind=small}
![[rumors and news]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/rumors.gif){kind=small}
![[model release matrix]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/newmodelreleasematrix.gif){kind=small}
![[dealer network]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/dealernet.gif){kind=small}
![[desktop calendar]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/calendar.gif){kind=small}
![[exhaust notes]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/exhaust.gif){kind=small}
![[tov forums]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/forums.gif){kind=small}
![[links]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/links.gif){kind=small}
![[search]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/search.gif){kind=small}
![[sponsors]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/sponsors.gif){kind=small}
![[garage]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/garage.gif){kind=small}
![[login]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/login.gif){kind=small}
