| JamaicameCRAZY said: Whatever dude its like im talking to a wall. Consider this my last comment on this discussion. 1."I first drove the CR-Z at a press junket, which included twisty (but unfamiliar) roads and an autocross circuit (a low-speed 1st- and 2nd-gear racetrack with lots of sharp turns). Overall, I was a bit underwhelmed. But out on Auto Club's fast track, the CR-Z's true character really came out. Not only is the CR-Z nimble, but it's surprisingly well balanced, even going so far as to kick the tail out in the bends. The technical term for that is oversteer, and it's a rare trait (and a rare treat) in factory-stock front-wheel-drive cars, most of which are engineered to understeer (plow straight ahead) so as not to surprise drivers in a panic swerve. The CR-Z wasn't terribly fast in the straights, but that meant I could push deeper into the corners before hitting the brakes, which held up very well to the abuses of track use. I was surprised and delighted" http://cars.about.com/b/2010/09/16/track-day-surprises-honda-cr-z-and-lexus-is-f.htm So yes you have to drive the car. 2. i wasnt saying you were wrong i was saying i have never herd it used that way. 3. You said " the antithesis of the car anyone would want to drive in Gran Turismo, and anyone interested in the car isn't going to be looking at it for its performance. There are plenty of other cars being released/unveiled at the moment that appeal far more to the type of person that would be interested in GT5" thats why i included the link. If no one wanted to race it and thought it was crap then why is there aftermarket parts for it? A company isnt going to design stuff for racing for a car that nobody does. So that right there is proof people see potential in the car for racing. you = wrong. http://www.topgear.com/uk/car-news/crz-wraptivo-2010-09-02 people modding it for November's SEMA show. What reviewers have said. "The Honda CR-Z hybrid has been one of the most often-tuned Honda vehicles in recent time." - Top Gear. ""is set to become one of the most desirable cars on the planet" and concluded with "it's a lulu to drive". A lulu? Is that good?" - Mirror "In short, the CR-Z is a car that anyone, from urban commuters to weekend racers, can enjoy" - Road & Track Will any of this get you to stop thinking you know everything? No but hell i gave it one last try. |
That first review is a joke. It is impossible for a FWD car to "kick the tail out." You need a longitudinal force on the rear wheels in order for that to happen (i.e. rear wheel drive). What he did was powerslide the car which is caused by jumping on the brakes and turning sharply. The rear tires begin to slide, losing grip, and the tail end comes around. This guy has no clue what he's talking about. While that's technically oversteer, it has nothing to do with how the car's set up. You can make absolute boats that refuse to turn oversteer by overloading the tires and making them slide. Still doesn't change the fact that a train is more responsive than those cars. Maybe if you actually quoted the whole review instead of that snippet, you'd see he felt underwhelmed. It performed poorly in the tight autocross section (i.e. where this car can actually reach max corner speeds). He only liked it on the larger track because it was slow and easy to drive. He didn't have to brake as much, and there wasn't as much he could screw up through these corners. Citing some guy from about.com is hardly the best source on how well a car handles.
Spoon does not modify cars for performance. Body kits and useless exhausts? That's not performance, that's entirely an image thing.
Your "Top Gear" quote is from a site called Top Speed. Wonderful "source" right there. It looks like some BS blog trying to get hits. It's just got a bunch of riced out CR-Z's. A bodykit and 22 inch wheels (which hurt performance because of all the unpsrung weight they add) is not tuning a car to make it faster.
Look, how about you answer me this. If the CR-Z really had the potential you claim it does (and you're clearly an expert when it comes to cars, and you're not arguing with a mechanical engineer with a good amount of vehicle dynamics knowledge and experience tuning race cars), why does Honda continue to use the Civic in all the Touring Car Championship Series it races in? Because the whole sporty image is all marketing and a complete joke. It's a heavier Honda Fit (there's a FWD low power car I actually like) with a weaker powertrain and worse balance.
It's going to continue to have idiot reviewers review it as nimble because it's got a short wheel base and thus rotates very quickly and it's slower than molasses and thus very easy to drive around a track. That doesn't make it fun. I've read several CR-Z reviews, and they all say the same thing. It's slow. It's not bad on some country roads (because they're only taking it to 7/10), but the moment they push it to the edge it's pretty underwhelming. I was pretty psyched when Honda promised a CRX successor, but this is a pretty pathetic one.
