Yawn... production Honda CR-Z debuts at Detroit Show

http://www.blogcdn.com/www.autoblog....cr-z_ex_05.jpg

Yawn… Honda debuts production CR-Z at Detroit Auto Show

Ugly little fvcker, isn’t it? It's got a snout only an aardvark could love.

I don’t understand this car – it’s supposed to be the hybrid for driving enthusiasts, but it’s seems to have completely missed the mark:

• 122 hp, 128 lb-ft of torque, 0-60 mph: 9.7 seconds. Enthusiast fail.
• 31mpg city/37 mpg highway. Hybrid economy fail.

By comparison, a Mini Cooper S gets 29mpg city/34mpg highway, 172 hp, 177 lb-ft of torque (192 lb-ft on overboost), 0-60mph in 6.2 seconds, seats twice as many people, and looks 1000x better (imho).

Actually, even a standard Mini is better - 118 hp, 114 lb-ft of torque, 0-60 in 8.5 seconds, 28mpg city/37 mpg highway, and no hybrid powertrain complexity (and weight) to worry about.

Why one earth would anyone buy this thing?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by altiain

Why one earth would anyone buy this thing?

---

For some secretary type who wants a 2-doors Pyrius! I agree with you, Honda has been missing the mark lately!

It has alot of styling cues from the CRX right up until you get to that nose. Where the heck did that come from?

the boys on top gear were thrilled with this guy on the last episode ;)

There's probably a good size pool inside corporate Honda with the big wigs betting how ugly they can make a car and still sell it like hotcakes. My cousin works there I'll ask him what the heck they were thinking.

Like HH said, that nose has to go. It wouldn't be so bad if it didn't look so bulbous. Basically if the hood could be dropped to the level of the bottom of the mirrors and then slope forward to the top of the gill opening it might look OK.

I like the looks. The straight side view is not the best but it looks good from the front and front/side. I agree about the rest. What's the point of a hybrid that only gets 31/37 mpg:confused:. Let's see how heavy we can make our new small car.

I suspect the Euro bumper standards are responsible for killing the nose of the car. They just won't allow a nose that slops way down like the original CRX did.

Interesting. Just noticed that the rear brakes are substantially larger than the fronts. Maybe because most of the weight is fourteen feet out inf front of the front wheels?

I think that is artist fail. The actual photos do not show that brake issue.

http://www.blogcdn.com/www.autoblog....etroitlive.jpg
http://www.blogcdn.com/www.autoblog....etroitlive.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by altiain

Why one earth would anyone buy this thing?

---

I think the same sort of people that buy celicas, scion tcs, and all of the other 'sporty' looking cars will be interested in this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by altiain

Interesting. Just noticed that the rear brakes are substantially larger than the fronts. Maybe because most of the weight is fourteen feet out inf front of the front wheels?

---

The front brakes are a combo of the discs and regenerative.

Wow, my 97' hatchback with 213k miles gets that for mileage. I think I'll just keep it and my back seat.