Detroit 2010: Honda CRZ

[mustang84]

Autoblog: http://www.autoblog.com/2010/01/11/detroit-2010-honda-cr-z-promises-to-bring-driving-joy-to-the-hy/

Jalopnik: http://jalopnik.com/5445212/honda-cr+z-122-hp-33-mpg-worst-of-all-worlds?skyline=true&s=x

After a few weeks worth of leaked images and brochure fluff, Honda has finally pulled the covers off its next new production hybrid hatchback. The Japanese automaker claims the CR-Z will bring back the kind of driving joy that hasn't been felt since the CRX last left dealer lots in 1991, saying that owners will embrace this new mild hybrid with both their hearts and minds. We certainly hope they're right.

While we're really digging the looks of the CR-Z and the way it hearkens back to the classic CRX and even the original Insight hybrid, we've gotta admit that we're a tad bit disappointed with the specifications. With 122 horsepower on tap and just 128 lb-ft of torque from the 1.5-liter VTEC four-cylinder with Integrated Motor Assist, shouldn't we expect more than 36 miles per gallon in the city and 38 on the highway from the CR-Z?

Let's just hope that the car's driving dynamics live up to the lofty standards to which Honda is eluding – at least there's an optional six-speed manual transmission to go along with the expected CVT automatic. We'll know soon enough know how it goes down the road, as the 2011 CR-Z is slated to hit the ground running in the summer. In the meantime, check out our live images below and click past the break for the press release.

Edited January 12, 2010 by mustang84

[Satty]

A-pillar back is fantastic, a-pillar forward is a bulbous mess.

[PurdueGuy]

I'm not normally one who cares much about overhangs, but this is pretty extreme. I like the look of the front end when you look at it from the front, but from the side it's pretty bad.

[Intrepidation]

Holy crap, and people think the Aveo has a long one? That's completely disproportionate. Honda really must be trying to see how ugly they can make their cars until people stop buying them.

[FAPTurbo]

How on Earth did they manage to screw this one up?...

[§carlet §wordfish]

Growing up I can't remember seeing a car that didn't have what you people consider a "long" front overhang, so this looks perfectly fine to me.

Edited January 12, 2010 by §carlet §wordfish

[Intrepidation]

Yeah but you have have a unique taste in cars so that's understandable. After all you like the C6 and that has a mighty overhang as well.

Although the C6 at least has more mass behind the front wheels to help make it look less awkward.

But hey, different strokes.

[ocnblu]

Holy Toledo, that profile shot is absolutely hilarious and shocking.

[avant1963]

This will have my vote for the ugliest production car from NAIAS. There is nothing, NOTHING attractive, fun, or interesting.

Plus a 122 HP HYBRID that gets 36 city? FU Honda. If the Lemmings in the US eat this one up, hold on to your classic iron boys because it's over.

[DetroitNut90]

RX-8 meets Insight. The interior's not very nice-looking either, IMO, but I kinda like the setup of the speedo and tach.

[Intrepidation]

I just realized...that interior is really poorly designed...look at how far away the Nav/stereo is from the driver.

[Satty]

I just realized...that interior is really poorly designed...look at how far away the Nav/stereo is from the driver.

Steering wheel controls.

[turbo200]

this is the global debut of a very ugly car. in their press conference, honda's announcer stated he hoped i would love my first glance on their new hybrid as much as they do; i don't. it has some pretty bad angles, and there's no coherent theme. is it supposed to emphasize practicality like a good hybrid should; or it should I say it doesn't look sport at all so it cannot capitalize on the novelty of being the first genuine sports car hybrid. not impressive at all honda, and quite disappointing if this points at what's coming.

[§carlet §wordfish]

Regardless of styling, the specification does sound pretty pitiful.

[daves87rs]

Regardless of styling, the specification does sound pretty pitiful.

+1

[siegen]

A straight on side profile picture like that with no shadowing is going to make the overhang look bad. Wait until you see it in person and walk around it. Until then Inside Line has a quick video from the show with various angles of the CRZ. Looks pretty damn nice to me.

As for the specs. The weight is disappointing, since it gained a good 150+ lbs compared to the specifications for the Euro model. The EPA ratings are also low, which is surprising. Easy to dismiss this vehicle based on the specs alone, but I am very curious to see how it pans out. The Insight, after all, exceeded its EPA ratings notably. Performance-wise I wouldn't expect anything more than a regular Civic coupe (I think I've said that before).

[PurdueGuy]

A straight on side profile picture like that with no shadowing is going to make the overhang look bad. Wait until you see it in person and walk around it. Until then Inside Line has a quick video from the show with various angles of the CRZ. Looks pretty damn nice to me.

As for the specs. The weight is disappointing, since it gained a good 150+ lbs compared to the specifications for the Euro model. The EPA ratings are also low, which is surprising. Easy to dismiss this vehicle based on the specs alone, but I am very curious to see how it pans out. The Insight, after all, exceeded its EPA ratings notably. Performance-wise I wouldn't expect anything more than a regular Civic coupe (I think I've said that before).

It does look a bit better in the video, though it is still a pretty big overhang, but not as ungainly as in the picture above. It'd better get better than EPA rating fuel economy, though - I get similar fuel economy in my Saturn (a bit less city, a bit more highway), and I have more cabin & trunk space, more power, and probably less weight. I'm still waiting for someone to simply produce a lightweight, simple, aerodynamic car with an efficient but not wimpy engine. I think the right combo there with modern engine tech would rival hybrids without the extra cost & weight.

[siegen]

I'm still waiting for someone to simply produce a lightweight, simple, aerodynamic car with an efficient but not wimpy engine. I think the right combo there with modern engine tech would rival hybrids without the extra cost & weight.

The problem is that with modern safety standards and expected amenities, it's difficult for a manufacturer to make a really lightweight car. Or at least make one that gets 5-star crash ratings.

The closest you might get to the CRZ in a gas version is the Civic coupe, which gets 29 combined EPA mpg to the CRZ's 33-37 (MT-CVT). Through a bunch of hypothesizing, I came up with an estimated MPG figure for a 1.5L non-hybrid (essentially Fit powertrain) CRZ, which would be 30-31 mpg combined. Still a ways off from the hybrid's figures.

Really I think hybrid powertrains are a good option. It is mostly the batteries that make it so unwieldy (about 130~ lb weight penalty for Honda IMA/Battery pack -most of the weight coming from the battery pack). Battery tech needs to move forward faster!

[Camino LS6]

This will have my vote for the ugliest production car from NAIAS. There is nothing, NOTHING attractive, fun, or interesting.

Plus a 122 HP HYBRID that gets 36 city? FU Honda. If the Lemmings in the US eat this one up, hold on to your classic iron boys because it's over.

I'll add my vote to yours - this thing is awful.

What happened to Honda?

[siegen]

I'll add my vote to yours - this thing is awful.

What happened to Honda?

If anything, this is the most "Honda" Honda in a long time. Not sure what you guys are smoking. There have been some awful pictures floating around (have a look at Jalopnik's gallery and ROFL a bit), but this car is very nice looking. Of course if you dislike the small car/CRX look then you probably won't like it. Can't wait to see this in the flesh.

[Drew Dowdell]

It's even uglier in person.

[cire]

To me, it's just another ugly Honda. I really wish this company had some great looking styling to go along with their stellar reputation. There is not one current Honda/Acura product that I would consider buying.

[Cory Wolfe]

Overhang is certainly reaching for the curb, but otherwise I think it looks decent. Nothing spectacular, but no CR-X. Specifications are definitely disappointing, though.

Edited January 13, 2010 by blackviper8891

[bobo]

This looks spectacularly awkward. Even if they had to keep the same lumpy shape, the detailing could be better not to highlight the more unelegant aspects of the design. Honda probably had their best styling in the early 90s.

[Intrepidation]

If anything, this is the most "Honda" Honda in a long time. Not sure what you guys are smoking. There have been some awful pictures floating around (have a look at Jalopnik's gallery and ROFL a bit), but this car is very nice looking. Of course if you dislike the small car/CRX look then you probably won't like it. Can't wait to see this in the flesh.

Well what we're not smoking is the Honda drugs you do, which is why we don't like it.

It's a a shame, I wish Honda would hire some decent designers again.

[Lamar]

Well what we're not smoking is the Honda drugs you do, which is why we don't like it.

:lol:

It's a a shame, I wish Honda would hire some decent designers again.

Agreed. IMO the Civic and Fit are all that's left...