In reply to ProDarwin:
Ok, yes the Cr-z is more effecient. The OP did say to talk him out of it
I just thought coming from a G35 that the OP would enjoy an Si better for close to the same price since he was considering a Honda. Maybe these two cars aren't in the same class to compare?
If you're trying to trade power for fuel economy and interior storage, go buy a Honda Fit Sport and invest the remaining $10,000. Having driven the CRX, Fit, and CR-Z extensively, I'd dare say the Fit is closer in spirit to the original CRX than the CR-Z is.
Well hell if it is going down that road... Mazda2.
calteg wrote: I'd dare say the Fit is closer in spirit to the original CRX than the CR-Z is.
I've heard that before. Would I be correct in saying the CR-Z is a reborn Insight two-seater trading some MPG for performance and the Fit is a reborn CR-X with two added doors? Still, both would be hot with the K20
In reply to Fletch1:
Every small Honda would be better with a K20!
I'd say the Fit is a reborn Civic Wagovan... with a worse suspension.
The CR-Z is an sporty reborn Insight. Definitely closer to Insight than CRX, but closer to both than the Fit is to either.
ProDarwin wrote: Definitely closer to Insight than CRX, but closer to both than the Fit is to either.
PERFORMANCE- The performance may resemble the original CRX(which I have owned and loved), but compact cars have come A LONG way since then. You can get MUCH better performance for the similar price of a CR-Z.
CRX Si performance in abstract numbers wasnt anything to talk about even in the 1980s! For the same price you could get a shelby version of a turbo dodge that would blow it out of the water anywhere, any time. Obviously the objectivity of the numbers does not tell the whole story! I think it's more about the driving and ownership experience. I personally feel and have said that i dont think the CR-Z is a bad performing car, even just by the numbers.. Ive still not driven one but having raced one on the highway and ridden in one in autocross i know the performance is fine by me in the more important subjective evaluation.
Having driven both the 1st gen insight and the CR-Z I completely agree with ProDarwin. The manual 1st gen insight is a BLAST to drive.
My favorite and only "giant slaying" story. I had a relatively fast leak in the left rear tire, and was trying to get home quickly in a pretty hard rain. A Camaro SS, thinking that I was trying to race (I guess ... not sure why else he would try to smoke an insight) comes flying up. Both of us rolled through the just changed green light, I hadn't really noticed him other than that there was a pretty sweet camaro to my right. Come up to a loooong right hand sweeper that's right before my house that I take all the time. Gun it going through, he follows suit, obviously climbing past me at a terrific rate only to have his back end skip out (it's a wide five lane empty on a weekday night), he brakes hard (about when I realize that we were "racing") I fly past him to the next red light. He stops well short of sitting side by side when he gets there and flys off as soon as it turns green getting sideways and then onto the interstate. Pretty hilarious overall.
Anywho, they drive just the same. Both have two stage brake pedals that take a lot of getting used to, both have oddly torquey motors from their electric assist, and both feel like you are going a lot faster than you are.
mmosbey wrote: The brakes have an odd rubbery feel. Modulation is fine, but there is a rubbery section of the travel, and pedal placement in that section defines braking more than pressure. Effort was higher too - I had to get the ball of my foot on the brake when I'd usually use my big toe.It didn't seem to have one of those throttle/brake override dohickeys that kill the throttle if the brake is depressed.
I can't tell from this paragraph if you know or not, but I'll just throw it out there just in case: The CR-Z, like most hybrids, has a two stage brake pedal. When you lightly press the pedal you are "braking" by regenerating the batteries via your electric motor, but using little if any actual brakes. When you press more firmly it combines the two.
You should abuse this frequently, as it keeps your IMA topped off and your brakes happy. My insight, before it got smashed to bits, had NEVER had it's brakes changed. It was at 160k. When driving carefully I rarely actually engaged the brakes till I was nearly stopped (doubly true in manual hybrids). We could also average around 50-70 mpg depending on if it was straight city - mixed - straight interstate.
In reply to accordionfolder:
I was aware of the regeneration, but I hadn't really caught the full positive implications. I've always been taught to understand that brakes convert kinetic energy I've paid for and brake components I've paid for into heat I cannot use and do not want. I'll gladly take electricity over unwanted waste heat any day, so I'll try driving with that in mind.
Do I have to have the car in gear for regeneration to work? I'm not sure what side of the clutch the IMA motor is on.
You'll have to be in gear: The IMA style hybrids use an electric motor sandwiched between the motor and transmission. This also mean you don't have to use the starter motor to start/stop the motor, another useful feature of hybrids.
You'll want to balance regen braking and the automatic cut-off feature (which isn't hard on the motor, it's designed for it). Auto cut-off will only happen when you're in neutral, but is extremely useful for increasing gas milage in stop/go city.
The difference between the Prius Hybrid system vs the honda is the Toyota can run on JUST the electric motor. Inflating it's city milage quite substantially compared to it's honda counterparts. The honda, since it's wedged, can't just run one or the other. I still prefer it for it's simplicity and durability. For example there are several Honda insights on the local forum with 300,00+ miles on them. Very, very durable.
Rust - if you were in Louisiana, where we don't have any snow preparedness, and where cars under thirty years old have no rust, would you buy a lease car that was first registered in March of 2011 in Minnesota? Carfax shows it was still there in February of 2012 when it had an oil change. The odometer advanced just 1786 miles from the last oil change in Minnesota when it showed up for sale 'round here. Of course, 'round here is itself an 1197 mile trip from Minnesota.
I test drove this car last week, but didn't know about its history. It has a couple of minor stains, but otherwise looks nice.
For example there are several Honda insights on the local forum with 300,00+ miles on them.
338,000 and counting, here.. I cant believe it needs a swaybar endlink!!
That sounds pretty safe to me, most owners/dealers will allow you to take the car to a mechanic. You could have a peak at it's underside on a lift?
You'll need to log in to post.
