Author: Antony Ingram
Photography: Honda and Antony Ingram
Where some cars have star quality from the moment you see them rotating on a motor show turntable, the appeal of others takes a little time to percolate.
For the Honda CR-Z, you might say it has a foot in each category. First shown in concept form at the 2007 Tokyo Motor Show, the ‘Compact Renaissance Zero’ had the hallmarks of a revival – a renaissance, even – of the much-loved CRX, the fizzy little fastback coupé that had made way in 1991 for the targa-topped CRX Del Sol.
The CR-Z featured the same wedgy and aerodynamic profile, a compact footprint, and a glassy split tailgate, with a shallow roofline above a more upright element. It was also a two-plus-two, with rear seats as small as you can get away with while still nominally accommodating four, and had the promise of being light, offsetting the modest capabilities of a new petrol hybrid drivetrain.
This concept was followed by another at the 2009 Tokyo show, this time a lot closer to production and joined by details of its 1.5-litre capacity, the availability of a six-speed manual gearbox, and a starting price of around £18,000 in the UK – something that would put the Honda CR-Z in line with coupé rivals like the Volkswagen Scirocco or hatches like the MINI Cooper.
When the production car arrived in summer 2010 though, the press and public greeted it with a lukewarm reception. Despite arriving at a lower than anticipated price – £16,999 for the entry-level car, rising to £19,999 for the GT model – the car was criticised for losing much of the visual impact of the concepts (fair if talking about 2007’s original, less so if the comparison was 2009’s near-identical preview), for lacking performance (122bhp, 0-62mph in 9.9 seconds), and for not being quite economical enough in a world of diesels (56.5mpg).
Reviews were gently positive, but far from glowing. Evo and Autocar both gave the new car 3.5 stars out of five, CAR gave it four, but consensus was broadly that it wasn’t quite as exciting as people hoped, nor a true fuel-sipping hybrid. In the power-hungry US especially, the CR-Z was summarily dismissed for its perceived lack of power; never mind that the vast majority of sales of the first two generations were for the stripped-back gas-savers rather than the screaming VTEC models.
Your author’s first taste of the Honda CR-Z came after a gentle update in 2012, which swapped from nickel to lithium batteries, got a 20bhp electric motor in place of the original’s 13bhp unit, and gained 8bhp overall, now to 130bhp. There was also a little ‘S+’ button on the steering wheel, which could call on full motor assistance for five seconds when you needed it – though the CR-Z’s Sport mode, selected by button alongside Normal and Eco modes, did much the same anyway.
After a week with the car, I wondered why my colleagues had been so harsh on it. It was no rocketship for sure, but there was enough pep to be fun on a B-road, and the hybrid assistance gave it a kick from rest completely alien to most Hondas of the period. It also averaged an easy 50mpg over the course of a week – more than respectable for a sporty car in 2013, especially one with no diesel clatter and all-or-nothing power band. And it was fun to throw around corners too, which surely is the point of small, sporty cars like the CR-Z. Yet I felt like I was shouting into the void.
So it feels vindicating that today, when you turn up to any of the big Japanese car shows held around the country – and doubtless a few abroad, too – you’re almost guaranteed to see a lineup of CR-Zs. They’re almost always modified, and almost always owned by relatively young enthusiasts.
I like to think they recognise the same things in the Honda CR-Z that I did more than a decade ago: its handy size, its economy (more important now given higher fuel prices than it ever was back then), the typically smooth Honda powerplant and snappy six-speed gearbox, and the styling, which arguably looks better than ever – particularly when equipped with a set of smart Rays or Enkei wheels that do justice to the CR-Z’s proportions.
No doubt a few owners would prefer an original CRX, but with most of those rotted, thrashed, or pristine and priced accordingly, the CR-Z is the perfect modern equivalent, being vastly more affordable (prices start from under £3,000 today) and a great deal safer and easier to run at that.
If those don’t exactly make for future classic qualities, then consider some others. Small, manual coupés have basically gone extinct since the CR-Z disappeared, so the Honda’s one of the last of a dying breed. It’s a relatively rare sight itself, so the visual impact of those CRX-inspired lines will carry on well into the future.
And hybrid power definitely has a better reputation than diesel does these days, so with our tinfoil hats within reach, it may be a little longer before CR-Zs are legislated or priced off the roads, unlike that Scirocco TDI with a dodgy ECU tune and missing DPF. Honda reliability should ensure it sticks around long after the last R56 MINI has expired from coked-up valves and snapped timing chains, too…
So perhaps the Honda CR-Z’s star quality is only just beginning, and a small but loyal community of enthusiasts are granting it the following promised by that first 2007 concept.
Have you ever driven or owned a CR-Z? Do you think it deserves modern classic status? Share your thoughts and stories in the comments below!
More future classics you might enjoy
Future Classic: BMW i8
Future Classic: Volkswagen Scirocco
Future Classic: Audi TT Mk1
I owned a crz gt for a couple of years & absolutely loved it . Every time I sat in it , it gave you a very special feeling . The dashboard and driving position are the best layout I have ever had in a car . Yes , it wasn’t the fastest thing on the road , but very few other cars look as good and feel as well built . All this in a car that is eco friendly , mega cheap to run and reliable as hell. You’ll be hard pushed to find something as good . Just accept it as a two seater , with a big boot and you won’t be disappointed. Of course it has classic status .
I went to the original press launch in Japan. Honda made such a big deal about the efficiency and lightweight packaging of the hybrid engine. Did ex CR-X buyers really want to know about that? Honda felt a responsibility, I guess, to show it was building a modern eco style car. The biggest issue was that the car really didn’t handle. There was no brilliant CR-X style spark through corners, it felt flat, safe, predicable – even boring. No wow factor The design was good, to be sure, but for the enthusiast driver, there was something missing. If I recall, there had been quite a bit of grief for Honda in the US where the CR-X was fast and fun, but too often involved in accidents with young drivers and insurance claims. Thus we can imagine a call to make a successor car that “looked” like the CR-X but was slightly toned down to make it more mainstream dynamically and with the IMA hybrid, more future tech and mature. It was a definite shift in direction – similar but different to the way Honda had gone from the second gen CR-X (a classic!) to the oddball, and again, softer CR-X Del Sol with its highly expensive retractable roof. Honda, then and now, is always changing.