A Forgotten Honda (And Why You Should Remember It)

For the 2016 model year, Honda quietly made some minor updates to its sport compact hatch. And, no, I am not talking about the Civic Type R. In case you forgot (and I wouldn’t blame you if you did), I am talking about the CR-Z, the de facto successor to the legendary CR-X. The already sporty-looking hatch gets a few minor cosmetic updates, along with some new features. However, the powerplant, drivetrain and chassis remain pretty much the same as the original model, introduced in 2010. In practice, these minor touch-ups do very little to change the CR-X; but what surprises me is the fact Honda even bothered with them in the first place.

Before I tell you how I really feel about the CR-Z, let’s start with some background on its spiritual ancestor. I’m not going to go into too much detail, because I’m sure that you CTzens are pretty familiar with the good ol’ CR-X. Like the CR-Z, it was a 2-door, 2+2 (2-seater in the N.A. market) Kammback-style, front-wheel drive hatchback based on the Civic of the day. In North America, despite the fact that the top-end Si model wasn’t equipped with the 1.6L VTEC engine, the CR-X was a popular sport compact due to its light weight, nimble handling, reliability, and stingy fuel consumption. While it certainly wasn’t the fastest car that money could buy, it was sure a hell of a lot of fun to drive. Even to this day, despite going out of production in 1991, people are still in love with the CR-X.

After the CR-X ended production, it never really had a successor, at least in the classical sense. The 2-seat, Targa-topped del Sol was built for 5 years. As likable as it was, the del Sol seemed like a completely different animal from the original CR-X. Eventually, Honda did make another Kammback in 2000 that became equally legendary amongst a different circle of drivers. I am, of course, talking about the super-efficient, super-slow Insight; the one car that petrolheads could possibly hate more from the Prius. It was powered by a 1000cc 3-cylinder gas engine paired with a small electric motor to assist it. It was legendary for being the first hybrid car to hit the market, and is the most efficient gasoline-powered passenger car ever sold in North America to this day. Having said that, the Insight became notorious for pretty much having nothing else of merit. As meritorious as it was, the Insight was crushed in sales by the much more practical Prius, and was killed off in 2006.

By 2010, the CR-X still didn’t have a proper successor, so Honda thought it would be a good idea to try and bring the 2+2 Kammback Honda back to life. Their vision with the CR-Z was to combine the best traits of both the Insight and the CR-Z—resulting in a car that would not only be efficient, but nimble and peppy as well. So Honda resurrected their Integrated Motor Assist technology for the CR-Z, and paired it to a 1.5 litre i-VTEC 4-cylinder. Although earthy, non-vehicle types had the option of a CVT, the CR-Z became the last hybrid so far to be fitted with a third pedal. Theoretically, the CR-Z would be a modernized version of the CR-X that remained true to its roots.

Unfortunately, as is often the case in the car business, that theory did not translate into the real world. The CR-Z was pitched as a “sport compact”, but the powertrain only made an average 122 horsepower, and a similar amount of torque in pound-feet. This was less than a base model Civic, and even less than the old CR-X Si! The added weight of the hybrid system also hurt the car’s performance, and 0-60 times were merely average. Equally as average was the fuel consumption, which was only rated at around 40 mpg on the combined cycle (though it had the advantage of being more efficient in the city. This did not necessarily make the CR-Z a bad car, as it was still fairly nimble and smooth-revving. However, it was priced way out of its league—it was nearly as much as a Civic Si or a Golf GTI—and was simply too impractical to compete as a commuter car. A less-expensive 3-door Golf TDI bested the poor Honda in almost every single aspect of ownership. Fast forward to 2016, and the CR-Z remains relatively unchanged, despite the fact that you can buy the much larger Accord and have better economy and performance for less money.

Again, none of the CR-Z’s attributes by themselves do a bad car make. But the fusion of the old Insight and CR-X was less than the sum of its parts, and it just simply was not good value in comparison to its competitors. As such, the CR-Z was a huge bust for Honda. As of 2016, Honda has yet to sell 30,000 CRZs in North America. In my home country of Canada, just five CR-Zs sold last month. I am amazed that Honda even bothered to keep producing it, because they have got to be losing money on every one that they sell. And it still costs between $21K and $26K US, depending on how well you spec it up. Honestly, in the presence of the excellent new Golfs, Mazda3s and even Minis out there, you’d have to be out of your mind to buy a new CR-Z.

Now, I’m not a CTzen just to tear apart vehicles that I don’t particularly think make any sense (Roast My Car fans, take note), and I wouldn’t be writing an article about something if I didn’t think anybody would be legitimately interested in it. Which brings me to the beautiful thing about the CR-Z: because it sold so poorly, it actually makes for a pretty good used car bargain. Tuners, take note: there is a lot of CR-Z left to unlock. Spoon Sports and Mugen have already quietly made their own hot versions of the CR-Z. Spoon elected to some engine, exhaust and ECU tuning (bumping the redline from 6500 to 8500 rpm), while Mugen bolted on a supercharger. Either way, you’ve got something that’s much closer to the spirit of the old CR-X, and something that you might actually envy. There is a ready supply of aftermarket parts available, so if you can find a manual CR-Z for a good price, I think you’ve got yourself one hell of a tuning canvas.

I actually kind of want one now…