So the new NSX (that isn't happening) was supposed to have a V10...

[alb_accord]

i think the HSV is running a v8 in japan. they found a loophole in the gt racing laws and i read somewhere they will be running that car in 2011 or 2012 not too sure.

[foamypirate]

Alright so 300# is high, but even still, it adds weight needlessly 1(150-200lb???) and doesn't seem to be much more efficient than a 2 seater conventional motor car would have been

We can't know for sure if it would have been more or less efficient. All I can say is this: EPA numbers aren't very accurate.

[awolanin21]

The civic (heavy as all hell) is what Honda is considering a sports car? The CRZ is considered a sports car? Its a hybrid!!! Nothing sporty about a car that's trying to help mother nature. Sports cars are supposed to be pollutants. No S2000. No NSX.



*side note* the vigor looks like a deformed cressida.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PdC71yOU4UM

I think this can qualify the CR-Z as a sports car..

I do believe the new NSX looks a whole lot sportier than the new Skyline. If they were to actually release the NSX, I would be more likely to buy it over the new Skyline

[deevergote]

Just because it makes insane horsepower, that doesn't mean the Bisimoto CR-Z is any more of a sports car than a stock CR-Z. It takes more than horsepower to make a sports car.


There is no new NSX.
The new Skyline is what we call the G37. The R35 GT-R is not a Skyline.

If the NSX replacement were to be released, it would very likely be double the price of the R35.

[awolanin21]

Unfortunately Honda needs to come up with a sports car soon! I just wanted to believe that CR-Z could be a sports car lol.


We will just have to hope that some day Honda decides to actually release something in the likes of an "NSX" styling.

[foamypirate]

Unfortunately Honda needs to come up with a sports car soon!

Why is that? Honda seems to be doing great financially, while many other automakers are struggling; many of whom have "needed" sports cars.

[awolanin21]

Well i should have corrected myself, I meant that I would like for them to come out with a new one so that Honda enthusiasts aren't left with very little variety to chose from.

[deevergote]

Sports cars are impractical "niche" vehicles. Honda is financially strong, but they're not as large as Toyota or Nissan (remember, Nissan is very closely tied with Renault... giving that pairing a very strong worldwide presence.)

Honda's bread and butter is their economical, reliable, affordable reputation. Even Acura is marketed with that concept in mind (most Acuras are priced below the cars they attempt to compete with... they offer smaller, more efficient engines, and fewer "gimmicky" options in favor of a clean, simple, reliable approach... and it works)
The S2000 was great, but accounted for a very small percentage of Honda's sales. The NSX was a legitimate supercar... bargain priced for that title, but still not a heavy seller. It was never intended to be, though.

Honda will no doubt offer a true sports car in the future, and probably something to compete with the GT-R and LFA on some level (maybe that hybrid...)


Right now, though... pouring R&D, advertising, etc... into a sports car would be a waste. The economy is struggling in most countries that would normally be valid markets for sports cars. On top of that, government regulations are getting increasinly stringent in terms of economy, emissons, and safety (all three are not exactly strong points for performance vehicles!)

Toyota is swinging their big balls around with the LFA. However, that car is more of a statement of dominance. Chances are, they're taking a loss on it, even with the outrageous pricetag.
Nissan's GT-R is useful in selling their other cars. If you notice, they use the GT-R in much of their advertising, showing how parts of the Maxima, Altima, etc... are engineered much in the same way as the parts in their supercar. The GT-R is Nissan's billboard. Fortunately for Nissan, they've built their reputation by having vehicles with a little more grunt than their competition. When Honda and Toyota were offering 1.6-2.0L vehicles, Nissan was putting out 1.8-2.5L in the same market.

Subaru, Mitsubishi, and Mazda have pretty much stayed within their set boundaries... They're still following the paths they set for themselves in the late 80s.

[owequitit]

The CR-Z is shitty but not for reasons anyone listed.



They could have saved hundreds of millions of dollars by ditching IMA + going with the Civic's IRS, which would have saved a good 300-400lb, enhanced the handling and basically come away w/the same gas mileage.

I agree though that the 8th gen Civic is a testament to Honda's progress in car making. If not for the interior design it would be an all around excellent car. However Honda has had quite a few missteps in the past few years.

Your assertions are wholly incorrect.

1) The entire IMA system, including the motor, battery and control unit weighs about 130lbs. On a purely empiricle MPG basis, that would have saved about 1MPG. The problem is that the CR-Z outperforms the Fit in the REAL WORLD. Knowing that recent Honda MPG gauges have been accurate, I was seeing in excess of 45MPG in town. I am sure highway would be a bit lower, but you are going to get real world MPG well in excess of the EPA number. This is also holding VERY strongly true with the Insight as well. Most people are beating the EPA numbers by a large margin, and are actually getting near Prius results in some cases. I was beating 40MPG in sport mode and was beating 50MPG in normal and ECON modes. Hardly something to scoff at, and easily in excess of MPG numbers. Unfortunately, I didn't have enough time with the car to get an actual longer term estimate, but I can assure you that it would not have been 30MPG.

2)The CR-Z also offers a power delivery around town that no NA 1.5L will ever match. It feels more like a V6 in sedate cruising and is very strong off the line.

In fact, after driving the CR-Z in sport mode, I am convinced that a lightweight hybrid solution would be a perfect ally to a high revving NA VTEC engine, because it would fill in the bottom end, and make such an extremely linear power delivery, it isn't funny. Not to mention how easy it is to alter the assist curve based on the fact that everything is electronic. You can't do the same on a turbo engine without large physical, mechanical limitations. The electric motor would assist off the line and at low speeds, and the gas engine would take over in the top end, which coincidentally is EXACTLY what it does now. You haven't felt a pull that linear in a Honda product...ever. Not even the J series quite matches it.

The problem is that every internet armchair quarterback who hasn't driven it seems to know how it performs, even though they really don't.

I will admit first hand that the CR-Z isn't all that fast, but frankly, around town, it goes a WHOLE lot better than people think it would, and it is linear, progressive, responsive and tailorable to your desires. The fact that it returns excellent MPG is another plus. There are only a handful of cars that will return anything resembling the real world MPG, and they all suck to drive comparatively speaking.

Alright so 300# is high, but even still, it adds weight needlessly 1(150-200lb???) and doesn't seem to be much more efficient than a 2 seater conventional motor car would have been

300 isn't even in the ballpark.

The rest is pure speculation based on internet rhetoric, hearsay and sticker numbers.

Just because it makes insane horsepower, that doesn't mean the Bisimoto CR-Z is any more of a sports car than a stock CR-Z. It takes more than horsepower to make a sports car.


There is no new NSX.
The new Skyline is what we call the G37. The R35 GT-R is not a Skyline.

If the NSX replacement were to be released, it would very likely be double the price of the R35.

HP is the first shortcoming of a CR-Z. Suspension is the second. Of course, the chassis that is stiffer than the FD2 Type R goes a long way toward alleviating that, and I am pretty sure that with little work (factory or otherwise), a CR-Z would be an extremely formidable opponent in any venue. How quickly we get snooty about "real peformance cars" and forget how no Honda in the past (barring the NSX and S2000) was EVER fast or "capable" in the eyes of the enthusiast masses. Meanwhile, we extoll the virtues of a 20 year old, flexy, underpowered Honda chassis, that would get its clock cleaned by a CR-Z of similar massaging. Flame me all you want, the CR-Z is the truest Honda product created in the last 15-20 years. I love the NSX, the S2K and even my Si, but with nothing more than a little more power, and a slightly more aggressive suspension, people would be singing a wholly different tune about this car.

I also remind you that the ORIGINAL function of the CRX was MPG. The HF debuted first, then the base model, and then the Si. The CR-Z IS the CRX reincarnate. I am sure that the "Hybrid R" prototype shown in LA probably hints at a little more than just an HPD excercise, but we will see.

One of the things that people who have not driven the car are incapable of understanding is just how much this car brings back most of the shit people have been complaining about with Honda products as of late.

A) "Hondas are too big." Ironic then that Honda releases the CR-Z to such complaints, only to be criticized by the same people bitching that it is too small/doesn't have enough room.

B)"Hondas are too heavy." Never mind that other than the Mini, and other oddities such as the Smart, this is about the lightest car on the market. (just like the CRX was). Yeah, it is heavier, but then again, so is everything else. Relative to the market, it is STILL a featherweight, coming it at 2600-2700 lbs.

C)"Honda has cheaped out on their interiors." As far as I am concerned, the CR-Z rectifies ALL of these issues. The plastics are soft, low gloss, nicely textured, and extremely well put together. This is still a cheap car, but along with the TL, TSX, etc, really rectifies the problem of Honda being criticized for cheap interiors. It absolutely DESTROYS the Fit in terms of perceived quality, and I would even wager that it exceeds the level of the Accord, while easily surpassing the Civic. It feels tight as drum, well thought out, and neatly executed and detailed. Just like all of the older Hondas.

D) "Hondas aren't sport, because they don't have feature X." Just like the old Hondas, it can't quite be quantified just how good this car actually drives, ESPECIALLY when you place it on the hybrid spectrum. No weirdness, no soul-less wonder. Hell, if you actually drove it enthusiastically, you could even have a little fun, especially with the 6MT. Even the CVT wasn't horribly boring, and that is from the perspective of going and coming from an Si.

Unfortunately Honda needs to come up with a sports car soon! I just wanted to believe that CR-Z could be a sports car lol.


We will just have to hope that some day Honda decides to actually release something in the likes of an "NSX" styling.

Why does Honda need a sports car? The Corvette is selling at about 40-50% of its pre-crash levels, the RX-8 is being cancelled, and Nissan has managed to move about a whopping 750 370Z's so far this year. Hyundai has also sold several hundred Genesis coupes. It hardly seems like a compelling reason to spend billions of dollars on a product that will take about 100 years to pay itself back. Make no mistake about it, enthusiasts be damned, Honda is in the business of building product that sells. Sure it sucks, but without good foundation product to pay the bills, there will never EVER be a Honda sports car.

Sports cars are impractical "niche" vehicles. Honda is financially strong, but they're not as large as Toyota or Nissan (remember, Nissan is very closely tied with Renault... giving that pairing a very strong worldwide presence.)

Honda's bread and butter is their economical, reliable, affordable reputation. Even Acura is marketed with that concept in mind (most Acuras are priced below the cars they attempt to compete with... they offer smaller, more efficient engines, and fewer "gimmicky" options in favor of a clean, simple, reliable approach... and it works)
The S2000 was great, but accounted for a very small percentage of Honda's sales. The NSX was a legitimate supercar... bargain priced for that title, but still not a heavy seller. It was never intended to be, though.

Honda will no doubt offer a true sports car in the future, and probably something to compete with the GT-R and LFA on some level (maybe that hybrid...)


Right now, though... pouring R&D, advertising, etc... into a sports car would be a waste. The economy is struggling in most countries that would normally be valid markets for sports cars. On top of that, government regulations are getting increasinly stringent in terms of economy, emissons, and safety (all three are not exactly strong points for performance vehicles!)

Toyota is swinging their big balls around with the LFA. However, that car is more of a statement of dominance. Chances are, they're taking a loss on it, even with the outrageous pricetag.
Nissan's GT-R is useful in selling their other cars. If you notice, they use the GT-R in much of their advertising, showing how parts of the Maxima, Altima, etc... are engineered much in the same way as the parts in their supercar. The GT-R is Nissan's billboard. Fortunately for Nissan, they've built their reputation by having vehicles with a little more grunt than their competition. When Honda and Toyota were offering 1.6-2.0L vehicles, Nissan was putting out 1.8-2.5L in the same market.

Subaru, Mitsubishi, and Mazda have pretty much stayed within their set boundaries... They're still following the paths they set for themselves in the late 80s.

This is true, and let us not forget that RWD and the S2K didn't put Honda on the enthusiast map. It was the Civic and CRX Si, followed by the Prelude, and the Integra. Honda was already pretty established by the time the NSX even debuted. It certainly didn't hurt the process, but it isn't what made Honda popular or good.

People talk endlessly about "Honda needs to return to their roots." Well, here they are. The CR-Z is much more Honda's roots than any V10 powered behemoth, regardless how cool it would have been. So if you want Honda to return to their roots, here you go. If you want an NSX, then fine, go ahead and bitch, but don't complain about "roots" because the CVCC was Honda's roots.

Finally, in typical short sighted American fashion, people look at the here and now, and proclaim what needs to be done for the future. The problem is that we are in a major demographic, financial and technological shift. The likes of which may have never been seen in the auto industry. Not only are Gen Y'ers more debt averse than any generation since the depression, but they prioritize their product features differently. Strictly from a marketing standpoint, they are proving to prefer more frugal trends, with less wasteful excess, and they are apparently more likely to prioritize electronic/progressive technology than HP. Like it or not, that is the way it seems to be panning out.

I see both points, because I sort of stradle the difference. I remember the successful 80's and 90's that were built on credit. However, I also have been an adult for the entirety of everything from 2000 on. Money is not easy, purchasing power is being lost, jobs are hard to come by, and loose credit is history. These all work to shape the generation that comes of age under such circumstance. A generation that will probably not behave like generations past. Just read an article on that the other day.

Anyway, back to the NSX engine theory. Without knowing specifics, it is impossible to say.

[deevergote]

I never said the CR-Z wasn't sporty or capable (even though I dominated one with my Fit on bald tires... ) It's just not a "sports car". The Civic never was either, nor the CRX, or the Integra. They were economy cars. Sporty, simple, relaible... economy cars. People carriers.

Remember, the S2000 traces it's routes back to Honda's FIRST non-motorcycle vehicle... the S500. Honda's automotive roots lie in sports cars, not econoboxes. The S500/S600/S800 had already run their course 3 years before the Civic was introduced.

The S2000 and NSX are the only TRUE Honda sports cars produced in the past 40 years. They are not economy cars. They are not people carriers. They are not grocery getters. They are impractical machines, good only for driving enjoyment and looking cool... which are the ONLY functions of a sports car!


You're right, Scott... all of the world's sports cars are struggling a good deal. Right now, the best sports car on the market for this economy is the Mazda Miata. It's inexpensive, and gives exactly what is promised.

[Tippey764]

Vigor turbo

Looks beast lol

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eOHXB...eature=related

[GHOST 2.2]

i think the HSV is running a v8 in japan. they found a loophole in the gt racing laws and i read somewhere they will be running that car in 2011 or 2012 not too sure.

the hsv was the nsx. the loop hole was that in the gt racing series, regulations is that it has to be a FR car and the car has to be production ready. however honda petitioned that the hsv was production ready, but they just chopped it off sales. they got away with it.

[deevergote]

Yeah, production ready doesn't mean they HAVE to produce it for the general public... just that it's a fully designed car that COULD be on the showroom floor.

I guess that technically means that years down the road, you could buy a retired race car, do some modifications to it, and drive it on the street

[HenRoc]

I drove a Miata at work last night...yeah I'm all set with trying to shoe horn myself in one let alone trying to get out as well.

[deevergote]

Yeah, AccordWarrior said he can't easily hit the gas pedal without hitting the brake as well...

Miatas are little, for sure! I drove one with a V8 for a very short distance (like... 1st gear...) BUT, they are the purest sports car you can get for that price. I would say that's the only true sports car that can truly weather this economy, because even though it's a very impractical vehicle, the cost of it makes it worth owning as a toy.