Despite Honda's recent announcement that the facelifted version of the CR-Z compact sports hybrid would make its premiere at the Paris Auto Show, the Japanese automaker pulled a fast one by unveiling the new car at the Indonesia International Motor Show in Jakarta today.
External changes include a redesigned front grille, which loses its vertical bars, revised front bumper, HID headlamps with LED daytime running lights, new fog lamps, reshaped door mirrors and rear diffuser, LED rear lights and new 17-inch alloy wheels.
Since the show car’s doors were locked, the only visible change in the cabin are the two-tone red and fabric for the seats.
One of the criticisms applied to the Compact Renaissance Zero (which is what CR-Z stands for) was that its hybrid powertrain lacked the oomph expected from a sports car.
The total combined output for the original CR-Z hybrid powertrain was 122HP with a peak torque 173 Nm (128 lb-ft). The hybrid model clearly placed an emphasis on fuel economy, with the car feeling barely lively only in the Sport setting, adequate in the Normal and…well, let's just say not quite fast in the ECON mode.
According to PaulTan, that the revised CR-Z now delivers 134HP and 190 Nm (140.1 lb-ft) of torque for the six-speed manual model and 133HP and 172 Nm (126.8 lb-ft) respectively for the CVT-equipped variant.
Perhaps more interesting is the addition of a new Plus Sport System that is activated through an S+ button on the dash and more than likely, makes the hybrid powertrain sacrifice some of its “green” credentials in favor of extra performance.
We will find out more quite soon, as the Paris Auto Show opens next week.
By Andrew Tsaousis
Photo Credits: PaulTan
10 Comments:
It doesn't look like they've address the primary fault with this model, that is too much weight too far forward over the front wheels, which makes it handle badly when pushed. Sad since this car is most reminiscent of the Honda CRXs from the early 80s, many of which are still on the road today, and from what I understand handle better than this new Honda.
Honda needs to redesigned and probably lengthen the wheelbase in order to move some of that weight behind the front wheels to correct this engineering flaw. Until they do that, this defect is unacceptable for anyone interested in a genuine sport hybrid.
I think Honda got its foot off wrong with this car in the first place. If this is suppose to be a sport car, then it should be designed and built as a gasoline model to get the specs and performance right, then convert it into a hybrid, much like the Toyota/Lexus approach with many of their gasoline model. It's a shame, the CRZ could've been a decent, fun little car.
How would changing the wheelbase affect weight distribution? If the engine and transmission are positioned to send power to the wheels via the halfshafts, when you move the wheels forward the powertrain goes with it; the engine doesn't stay where it was! Haha. Now THAT would be an engineering flaw.
Besides, stretching the wheelbase only makes a car less tossable. This car doesn't need high speed stability, it needs tossability.
I think your comment is just pretty generic in general. What are you basing it off of? The front overhang looks long to you? In truth, as far as weight distribution goes, the CR-Z benefits from having the battery in the back (which they mounted as low down as possible, almost as low as the gas tank). Speaking of gas tank, that was also moved to the rear, whereas the Fit (from which the chassis is based) has it in the front. In the end this gives the CR-Z a weight distribution of 60/40, which is excellent for a FWD car. For reference, the Civic Si coupe has a lesser 61/39 F/R split.
Autoblog says, "... mid-corner corrections were encouraging, as is the additional weight of the
rear-mounted battery pack, allowing the CR-Z to rotate quicker than
other short-wheelbase three-doors we've sampled. That additional pounds
and 60:40 weight split inspired confidence through high-speed sweepers ..."For the record, the CRX weight distribution was 62/38. I was driving a 90 Si around just today, and it sure is a blast. I don't know if it "handles better," but we are talking two entirely different beasts. The fact that the CRX has no power steering and weighs under 2200 lbs makes a world of difference. As do the 14" wheels and tires, and... just about everything else for that matter. It's really hard to compare cars separated by 22 years.
My comment is based on what I've heard from people who own them, and tuners who have tried to improve their performance. Also a number of such criticisms can be seen in reviews on shows like Top Gear. Almost universally the verdict is that they handle like a shopping cart that has had way too much weight piled over the front wheels producing what is often turns out to be catastrophic understeer in any kind of serious performance driving situation. No matter how much you turn the wheel, and the car keeps traveling in the same direction.
And if you rely on Autoblog, then you're obviously out of the loop in the automotive world, since everyone who knows anything about what's going on in the car business, and the blogging world, know that those guys sold their credibility to corporate interests long ago. It wouldn't surprise me if you're one of their minions, who pollute the Internet with their phony, pay to play, comments on the regular basis. And since you're an just another one of those anonymous cowards who haven't got the guts to put a name or a face behind your words, that seems very likely.
I had a look and the CR-Z's weight distribution is right there with the Civic Si. There are many other factors involved in a car's handling but pointing to just this one spec doesn't seem to answer handling differences. I for one never viewed the CR-Z as a "balls to the walls" sports car. It's simply meant to be a fun little two-seater. If its platform isn't the best to improve upon, don't blame the car, blame the people trying to make it something it's not. My guess is tuners would like to get close to a 50/50 split which they find hard, if not impossible with this model. I'd say blame the very short overhang in the rear. Good little car regardless.
What a sad little car. It needs more lipstick.
I'd be quick, so pay attention.
Changing wheelbase does affect weight distribution. Why do you think Porsche decided to stretch the wheelbase of the new 911, while keeping the size of the car pretty much similar? Because, if they stick to the old one, it'll have 38% of the weight at the front, making the car's rear end acted like a pendulum in mid-corner. With the wheelbase extension, the engine now sits (slightly) over the rear axle instead of hanging on to it, so now it has 39.5/60.5 weight distribution (f/r).
But I do agree, stretching wheelbase on front-engined car isn't really a good idea. All that chuckability is missing if you stretch the wheelbase. That's why Nissan reduced the wheelbase size on 370Z compared to the old 350Z.
Thanks for making that point, I was thinking of using Porsche as an example as well. Stretching the wheelbase is one of the easiest methods for increasing stability and shifting the center of gravity. The engineers at Porsche were able to deal with a number of issues with that rather simple fix.
Of course if you did it with this Honda it would enable engineers to move the engine mass further back towards the firewall, while maintaining the same passenger compartment size and layout. It would likely necessitate a total redesign of the drivetrain where the engine and transmission connect, but that appears to be the primary problem with this model in the first place, lengthening the wheelbase just gives ya significantly greater room to work with when you do that redesign.
It's time Honda produced a serious sport hybrid that offers customers +60 mpg along with the best possible handling, and this is the model they should do it with.
I was thinking about positioning its four-pot engine transverse and behind the front axle, like SLS or GranTurismo. But then I remember it's front wheel drive, so I'm a bit of an arse.
The "Sport+" mode in the 2013 CRZ is supposed to get you a 10 second boost in power from the electric motor. We'll have to wait and see what performance increase this gives. Kind of like Intel's turboboost where it will overclock a single core really high until it gets too hot. Another example kind of like this is Ford's 1 Liter Ecoboost engine, it can overboost beyond specs for a little while when you floor it.
With any luck the new CRZ will get the new Earth Dreams engine with part time Atkinson cycle for improved MPG while still having OTTO cycle for performance.
Post a Comment