• Registered users are encouraged to enable MFA/2FA to add an aditional layer of security to their account. More information can be found here: https://www.ncsc.gov.uk/collection/top-tips-for-staying-secure-online/activate-2-step-verification-on-your-email

CR-Z Type-R in the offing?

Thinking about it, this is how Honda played out the original CRX wasn't it? 1.6 then the 1.6VT?
 
They could have atleast used a pic of the real CR-Z :lol: It does sound promising though.... There are rumours of the next Evo being a hybrid too, engine driving the rear wheels and motors for the front :)
 
This is what I hoped would be confirmed at the Detriot Motorshow.

Clearly the pics are photoshoped, FN2 rear splitter!

I guess we'll have to wait for the Tokyo Motor Show to find out!
 
I haven't heard anything about a CR-Z Type-R... so it must still be more than 1 year away from production... at least...
 
£20k price tag is ridiculous. What is it with Honda, they slap on a Red H and add 5grand to the price :rolleyes:
 
newyorkaddict said:
£20k price tag is ridiculous. What is it with Honda, they slap on a Red H and add 5grand to the price :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

I think thats a fair price and I even think that 'if' this car makes into the show rooms in Type R format it will be even more than that. The current type R is just under £20k, hasnt got a hybrid engine, and with similar BHP is 0-60 in over 7sec, so £20k is a good price for a hybrid hatch that does 0-60 in close to 6secs.

However I think that a Type r CR-Z is too close in make up to what would be the next gen Civic Type R. More likely we are going to see a Hybrid Civic Type R in the next 2 years, which i think has been said/reported a while ago now
 
Neily03 said:
The current Civic Type R is £20768 OTR and does 0-60 in 6.6secs.
Click to expand...

Yes, I take it back, £20,768 OTR (was £19,800 last year i think). Although thats for a Type R GT. The non GT would be under £20k but I dont think that you can get them anymore.

6.6sec 0-60 ? Thats what it says? But is that what it can do? If an EP3 is 6.6 an FN2 is slightly slower is it not, although i dont want to turn this thread into another EP3/FN2 faster/slower thread!
 
Gusher said:
6.6sec 0-60 ? Thats what it says? But is that what it can do? If an EP3 is 6.6 an FN2 is slightly slower is it not, although i dont want to turn this thread into another EP3/FN2 faster/slower thread!
Click to expand...

Honda quote 0-62 of 6.6secs for both facelift EP3 and the current FN2 so how can that make the FN2 slightly slower?? :lol:

Gusher said:
, although i dont want to turn this thread into another EP3/FN2 faster/slower thread!
Click to expand...

Me either
 
Neily03 said:
Honda quote 0-62 of 6.6secs for both facelift EP3 and the current FN2 so how can that make the FN2 slightly slower?? :lol:
Click to expand...

Mainly, I dont believe honda when the say that it does 6.6. Its heavier by 63 kg (ok so its not a huge difference) and yet it has only 1 more horse power. It has a cheaper suspension, a much more refined feel to it and ride is a lot smoother. The honda promotional video of the FN2 was laughable as it seemed to be holding up the EP3 that was behind it and from my experience of driving both cars(not too much time in an FN2 though) i dont think its quicker, although the latter may be down to it feeling smoother, rather than slower. A few sales guys at honda thought it was slower and one also told me of them struggling to keep up with a standard Focus ST (which is meant to be 6.8 0-60). I would guess around 7 sec for the FN2 'if' the ep3 does 6.6 but without getting them both on the track at the same time with the same fuel load etc it is very close and the difference would probably come down to the ability of the drivers. They are both great cars but i think the FN2 should have been faster
 
Gusher said:
Mainly, I dont believe honda when the say that it does 6.6. Its heavier by 63 kg (ok so its not a huge difference) and yet it has only 1 more horse power. It has a cheaper suspension, a much more refined feel to it and ride is a lot smoother.
Click to expand...

Yes it's heavier and only has 1 more horsepower but vtec kicks in earlier and it has a lower final drive which is why the 0-62 is the same as the EP3, as for the rear suspension that has no effect on 0-62 times.

I've had my FN2 for 10 months and had an EP3 for over 3 years and there's nothing in it on the road. Any difference on a track is irrelevant as it a road car.
 
Neily03 said:
Yes it's heavier and only has 1 more horsepower but vtec kicks in earlier and it has a lower final drive which is why the 0-62 is the same as the EP3, as for the rear suspension that has no effect on 0-62 times.

I've had my FN2 for 10 months and had an EP3 for over 3 years and there's nothing in it on the road. Any difference on a track is irrelevant as it a road car.
Click to expand...

Ok so you are in a far better position than me to judge so im going to have to beg to differ on the subject. Cheshire is a long way to drive to try and prove a point! Back to that page 3 CR-Z Type R Hybrid Mugen thing..............!
 
The standard CR-Z is reported to be marketed at £18k, so £20k for a Type R or Mugen variant would be a bargain.

Judging by the previous logic in this thread, if the FN2 is slower than the EP3 but costs more new, then if the CR-Z Type R is quicker than the FN2, surely it should be cheaper too?! :lol:

Just my two pence worth...

P.S. I think my FN2's faster because it's Silver, Cosmic wasn't a fast colour! No offence intended! :lol:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top