New HONDA CR-Z
2L four-cylinder engine turbo charger.
US$ 21,130
What do you think?
>>13823635
It looks cool, but It would be cooler if it had a manual option. Same with the veloster.
>>13823635
I like it. But I think the rear would be better if they had put more or less the same design than the rear of the european Civic VIII, with the long rear light. Just like the old CRX actually.
>>13823635
That's just a facelifted old CR-Z.
The new CR-Z hasn't been released yet. It's rumored to get the Civic chassis instead of the Fit one currently, and it's RUMORED to get the 2.0L Turbo.
But nothing's been released and there are no confirmations
>>13823635
They're crap. Slow, no space, worse mpg than a fit. Get a fit
I feel like the CRZ couldve been so much more especially with a manual option but it didnt do a good job replacing the CRX. They did the whole "Lets remake a classic but make it new!" deal. Not for me, but its not a bad car.
where have i seen this before..
>>13823866
That's some wacky ass photoshopping
>>13823665
I was at the dealership talking to some fags who work for Honda, they said it's rumored that Honda didn't want to make anything that would intrude on the Civic Si's territory. If they made the CRZ noticeably better, it would be in that realm, and people would start to question "lol why am I looking at these things? which do I buy?" etc.
People are stupid and giving them too much choice is dangerous. The trick is to give them just enough. I see CRZs here and there, but most of them have some decals or logo on them and they're being used by a business. Maybe dealers gave them a really good deal to get them off the lot.
pic related, the only Honda worth owning anymore
>>13823635
>>13823638
CR-Z come in manual. The CVT is garbage.
WE don't need another 4 banger turbo car
the market is already overcrowded with turbo 4s
>>13824260
>Honda didn't want to make anything that would intrude on the Civic Si's territory
That didn't stop them the first time around with the CRX Si. What gives?
>>13823635
why would it cost 21k when current shitty one starts at 20k, what you are asking for would end up little under 30k
>>13823665
It's because they tried to cram the HF/DX/Si into a single model and failed miserably.
>>13823635
Why would they bother when this is coming out?
>>13823635
If it came with a manual I would buy it. Thats cheap and I miss my CRX.
>>13825464
The current one has a 6 speed so this one will probably too.
>>13823651
>literally
>>13823635
>2L turbo
sorry honda fags enjoy your outdated hybrid engine for a while longer
http://www.autoblog.com/2015/11/02/2016-honda-cr-z-official/
>>13825661
> tweak the interior by switching to an electric parking brake. This might seem minor, but because there's no longer a lever, a center console with an armrest can take up the open space.
meanwhile hondas leading the way in armrest technology
>>13823635
2.0 turbo you say? hhnnngggg
>>13823635
So since the CR-Z failed they're making a partsbin sporty CR-Z as a last ditch attempt to appeal to market before the old hardware is put out to pasture. Brilliant!
>>13823635
Still sounds way too expensive.
How can that car cost them more than like 12grand to actually make and ship? That's 9 grand of markup on a shitbox.
Another stereotypical modern shitbox.
>>13828286
>dildo shifter
top fucking kek
>>13828286
You're actually right about all the things you circled anon.
Ir's gross.
Coming from a Honda fanboy
>>13823638
Uh veloster comes in manual outside burger land.. And Honda will too.
Stay pleb america
