I had a 70 MPG sticker on my old insight, that way people didn't have to ask. Was seen by millions of drivers over the years.
I think the CRZ is a nice-looking car. I'm not sure I understand the hate towards it. And no it doesn't get 49mpg like a 1988 Civic CRx HF, but then a CRx wouldn't pass modern day emissions, would it? The CRx would be banned from sale just like VW TDIs were banned from California from 2005 through 6. Reason: Too much NOx coming from the exhaust.
The CRZ was designed to be a clean-running super-ultra-low-emission vehicle. The 1988 CRx would fail.
BTW while driving to work I saw a billboard for the Prius plug-in at 95 MPGe. Now that's really stretching the truth. It gets good economy for the 5 miles of EV mode, and then drops to 48 the rest of the way. Overall my insight burns less money than a plug-in prius would (given the same trip).
__________________
OWN: 61mpg Insight (greenercars.org score: 57)
both blue and silver,
and a 45mpg BeetleTDI (score: 47).
I had a 70 MPG sticker on my old insight, that way people didn't have to ask. Was seen by millions of drivers over the years.
I think the CRZ is a nice-looking car. I'm not sure I understand the hate towards it.
I in particular don't hate it. I just think it looks similar to most other modern cars ......... bloated. And it doesn't share much of the CRX-HF looks or heritage which the Honda reps were pushing when they heard I have a HF. Just do'n their job I suppose.
And no it doesn't get 49mpg like a 1988 Civic CRx HF, but then a CRx wouldn't pass modern day emissions, would it?
It probably would since I passed the last emissions inspection here in S. Fla with no trouble.
But cars only have to meet the requirements in force at the time of manufacture. My Lotus7 replica has to meet the requirements in force in 1963. (There weren't any then.)
The CRX did not fail in 1988 and it didn't fail the last time they had emissions inspections in S. Fla. In fact it was still exceeding the latest requirements that were in force at the time by a good margin. One of the readings was 1/10 the requirement (I don't remember which one though.)
Many times when I went through emissions inspection here the guy doing the inspection would call his supervisor over and they would put the car on the dyno like rollers and run the engine up in some gear while watching the data monitor. They would go around the car with mirrors on a stick looking under the car.
I finally asked one of the guys what was going on. He said that my emissions were so low compared to what they normally see on cars that they thought I was somehow injecting air into the exhaust system.
When I told them I was getting 50+ mpg they all started looking at the engine etc asking questions "Where did you get it? Do they still make it?" etc.
The CRx would be banned from sale just like VW TDIs were banned from California from 2005 through 6. Reason: Too much NOx coming from the exhaust.
Well since the HF wasn't banned that point is moot. And since they still aren't banned ...............
The CRZ was designed to be a clean-running super-ultra-low-emission vehicle.
So was the CRX-HF, and if the car is in good condition it still passes the emission tests thrown at it. It's not like states that have emission testing don't have any CRX-HF cars on the road.
The 1988 CRx would fail.
Please post the data or a URL that indicates that it would fail. Please also consider that there are licensed California CRX-HFs for sale on eBay now and then.
The 1988 CRx would fail modern standards for the same reason my 2006 Beetle would fail modern standards..... too much NOx for the exhaust & therefore cannot pass the new Tier 2 regulations.
Quote:
CRx HF probably would since I passed the last emissions inspection here in S. Fla with no trouble.
Correction: It passed the old 1988 standards. Not today's 2013 standards which are extremely tight (basically every car has to be a low-emission vehicle). If Honda were making and selling the 1988 CRx HF in 2013, it would have to pass today's standards which means lowering the NOx output. That means running the engine richer and dropping from 49mpg to around 42mpg, like the civic hf and cruzeEco (the current nonhybrid high milers).
__________________
OWN: 61mpg Insight (greenercars.org score: 57)
both blue and silver,
and a 45mpg BeetleTDI (score: 47).
What is a 1988 CRz? And what is the point of discussing it? Like does it really matter if a CRz/X can or can't pass today's standards?
You might want to correct your speel chereker so it doesn't allow CRz when you mean CRX (or do a copy/paste when quoting something).
Mainly because I didn't say,
---------------------
Quote:
CRz probably would since I passed the last emissions inspection here in S. Fla with no trouble.
---------------------
I said,
"It probably would since I passed the last emissions inspection here in S. Fla with no trouble."
for the same reason my 2006 Beetle would fail modern standards.....
Well since you may be still driving it, what is the point of dragging out the agony of it all? Just keep driving it.
too much NOx for the exhaust & therefore cannot pass the new Tier 2 regulations.
[13 yr old kid ON] Oh yeah? Well PROVE the CRX can't pass them either. [/13 yr old kid OFF]
This discussion is rather pointless without data and comparisons but have a nice day.
Well, my hate comes from a test drive of the cvt as well as stick while a newer insight owner. It was a disappointment.
Although better emissions helps us all in the long run, I dont see the edge for the consumer as most states do not allow special treatment such as HOV lanes, reduced tolls, etc like they use to.
When the 1988 CRx HF was sold, the NOx allowance was ten times higher than it is now. Which means if Honda tried to rebadge & sell it as a 2013 car, it would be outputting too much NOx. It would not pass. Just like any old 70s or 80s car would not pass modern 2013 standards.
This is as self-evident as "no gasoline car will ever be labeled a ZEV".
In order to make the CRx HF run with lower NOx, Honda would have to make the engine run richer, and the MPG would plummet to where a modern Civic HF lies (i.e. drop from 49 to 42 highway).
__________________
OWN: 61mpg Insight (greenercars.org score: 57)
both blue and silver,
and a 45mpg BeetleTDI (score: 47).
When the 1988 CRx HF was sold, the NOx allowance was ten times higher than it is now. Which means if Honda tried to rebadge & sell it as a 2013 car, it would be outputting too much NOx. It would not pass. Just like any old 70s or 80s car would not pass modern 2013 standards.
This is as self-evident as "no gasoline car will ever be labeled a ZEV".
In order to make the CRx HF run with lower NOx, Honda would have to make the engine run richer, and the MPG would plummet to where a modern Civic HF lies (i.e. drop from 49 to 42 highway).
Or they could just put a modern drivetran in it. K20s fit in rather easily. It wouldn't be hard to put a L series from a Fit in it. Or you could even put a ECA1 in if you wanted to go to all the trouble. It wouldn't be hard to fix the emissions issue. The bigger issue might be meeting modern crash test standards.
When the 1988 CRx HF was sold, the NOx allowance was ten times higher than it is now.
The solution to that is that the gov should force car companies to make cars forward compatible to the new [non existent] rules. But I'm not worried, my CRX had some emission level 1/10 the requirement back then.
Which means if Honda tried to rebadge & sell it as a 2013 car, it would be outputting too much NOx. It would not pass. Just like any old 70s or 80s car would not pass modern 2013 standards.
Darn, I'll bet my '27 Model T wouldn't do to well either. Especially so since it only came with rear wheel brakes! And the "brake" was inside the transmission! But there was backup. You just pressed the "reverse" pedal !
But getting back to the real world:
It's a good thing that Honda probably isn't planning on resurrecting the CRX because there are a few other things besides the emissions that wouldn't meet the new specs.
What happened, did a CRX-SI out drag your VW or something?
This is as self-evident as "no gasoline car will ever be labeled a ZEV".
Do you remember what Clark Gable's last line was in the movie "Gone with the wind"? (It was absolutely shocking.)
In order to make the CRx HF run with lower NOx, Honda would have to make the engine run richer, and the MPG would plummet to where a modern Civic HF lies (i.e. drop from 49 to 42 highway).
Why no talk about the performance? One of Hondas biggest achievements is its VTEC system and the ability to have several grinds on 1 cam and switching the rockers over to them during the rpm range of the engine.
I assumed from the description alone, sports hybrid that it may have a atkinsons grind for under 3500 rpm operation as well as the ima system for mpg, then when you open it up it or go over 3500 rpms and or WOT it switched over to all 16 valves on a more aggressive grind like in the SI.
Well if it is performance you want. This is a vid from back in 06 when I first did the K swap. The other car had slicks, which is why I got schooled out of the hole. Had to run partial throttle until the end of third gear to keep traction with the Falken Azenis. Slicks could put me deep into the 12's, or high 11's. We shall see this spring. Combined with the other mods. I've gotten 35mpg out of it too, but it's really hard to play nice with that much fun at your disposal, so I usually only get around 25mpg. This was a completely internally stock K20A type-R with intake, header, exhaust, and K-Pro ECU.
The AutoGuide.com network consists of the largest network of enthusiast-owned enthusiast-operated automotive communities.
AutoGuide.com provides the latest car reviews, auto show coverage, new car prices, and automotive news. The AutoGuide network operates more than 100 automotive forums where our users consult peers for shopping information and advice, and share opinions as a community.
