The Grover Wheel

Few cars have been so polarizing in recent years as the Honda CR-Z. Introduced to the United States in 2010, Honda enthusiasts pounced on what they were expecting to be the modern incarnation of the CR-X. Cheap, fast, light, the CRX had it all and the CR-Z took up the flag with… none of those elements. At similar pricing to upper-trim Civics, it wasn’t cheap. At 0-60 in around 9.5 seconds, it was the opposite of fast. And with the addition of an electric motor and batteries for the Hybrid system (oh, yeah, it’s a hybrid now), the CR-Z was over 2,700 pounds. And for these sins, the multitude of automotive writers dismissed the CR-Z as a fat fraud. But what if we approach it for what Honda promised it would deliver? Honda promised a vehicle that could be fuel efficient and fun, so how does it do on those few points? Lets forget about its older CRX brother and take the little CR-Z on its own merits.

Bad news first. The CR-Z’s hybrid system doesn’t get close to the mileage you might be expecting it to. Honda’s last two-seat hybrid, the original Insight, got upwards of 61mpg. So what does the futuristic CR-Z do? 70mpg? 80mpg? Nope. If you baby it, you get about 40mpg. So as a fuel-sipping eco car, it fails badly. My 2012 Honda Civic EX coupe, which is bigger and fatter than the little CR-Z, does 37 to 40 mpg on the highway. That’s a big strike for a car with a hybrid badge, and a strike for Honda’s marketing.

The bad news continues on the Fun front. Part of a fun car is, presumably, being able to go fast. The CR-Z doesn’t do fast. Over about 45 mph, the electric motor stops making any difference and the tiny 1.5 liter gasoline engine is revealed in all its wimpy glory. The sprint to 60 mph is more like a leisurely stroll and takes a pedestrian 9 or so seconds. Honda’s own Odyssey minivan will get there quicker. The CR-Z is certifiably slow.

But that’s where the major bad news ends. It may be slow from 0-60, but going from 20 to 30mph and other normal speed changes that we do every day feels surprisingly meaty. That comes down to the hybrid system that Honda has implemented. The effect is like adding a small side of chips to a grilled chicken sandwich. As long as you’re taking small bites of each together, the chips flavor the meat nicely. The two engines working in tandem feel satisfying at back-road speeds and the louder-than-expected exhaust note adds a bit of spice. But I still wish the grilled chicken were more flavorful on its own. When you run out of chips, that sandwich – we’re still talking about the car here, keep up with the metaphor – doesn’t offer much flavor to keep you entertained.

OK, now we’re really done with the bad news. I promise, it gets more positive now.

The CR-Z really does have some strong points working in its favor. The steering is delightfully weighty and tracks well around corners. The grip from the stock tires is plenty to carry what speed you do build up through the twisties. Body roll is very controlled and the whole chassis feels beautifully solid and tight. The car feels like it shrinks around your shoulders and holds on. Having driven the Mini Cooper, I can say that the chassis on the CR-Z can hold its own in a stiffness battle with the Beemer hatchback.

Even more surprising, the CVT automatic transmission my test car was equipped with didn’t feel buzzy or overworked. Previous CVT hybrids I’ve driven have felt asthmatic and unpleasant (I’m looking right at you, Prius), but Honda got it right this time. At only one point on the highway did I feel I was driving a CVT and not a normal automatic. And that was under full-throttle at 72mph in sport mode with me left wondering why the transmission hadn’t shifted yet. Only after I got out of the car did I remember that my panic was unfounded and that CVTs don’t actually have to shift. Oops.

The interior, too, is an unexpected delight. It feels futuristic and modern without being at all confusing. The buttons are well laid out and easy to use while on the move. Controls for the HVAC system and driving mode selection are arranged on the dashboard to each side of the wheel in a pattern that reminded me of the old Honda S2000 sports car. The steering wheel on the EX model I drove was leather-wrapped with funky red stitching and felt suitably sporty. Legroom is good, and headroom benefits from the lack of a sunroof. The back of the parcel tray behind the seats can also flip down, affording the CR-Z a relatively decent cargo space for such a small car.

Honestly, I liked the little CR-Z. It felt like the car was really making an effort to be both sporty and fun. It felt like a new waiter, eager to figure out what you want and bring you a refill for your water. It’s a shame that Honda played things so conservatively. The CR-Z is just too slow for the enthusiast drivers they were trying to attract. And it’s not frugal or spacious enough to appeal to the more sensible driver. But it is still a bit of both worlds. For the commuter who desires a bit of zest on their drive home, the CR-Z is eager to switch from eco to sport mode when the road gets twisty. I have to commend it for that. Yes, it’s a compromise. But does that have to be a bad thing? Compromises often mean that both sides lose a bit. But with the CR-Z, you still win a bit too. Like the dieter with their grilled chicken sandwich, a few chips can make all the difference in the world.