Home | Cars | Racing | Events | Features | Forums | About |
Pre-War Single Seaters and Grand Prix cars |
Indy Cars |
Formula 2 Cars |
F5000 Cars |
Post-War Single Seaters |
Can-Am (1966 - 1974) |
Group C and IMSA GTP (1982 - 1993) |
LMP Cars (1994 - present) |
GT Cars |
One Make |
Other Sports Cars |
2024 |
2023 |
2022 |
2021 |
2020 |
2019 |
2018 |
2017 |
2016 |
2015 |
2014 |
2013 |
2012 |
2011 |
2010 |
2009 |
2008 |
2007 |
2006 |
2005 |
2004 |
Ultimatecarpage.com
> Cars by brand
> Japan
> Honda
> CR-Z
Comments |
Honda CR-Z |
Article | Image gallery (16) | Specifications | User Comments (2) |
|
Full on 1.8 VTEC please |
madmalc 01-14-2010 |
This is what I want for my next car but as a previous owner of a '94 Civic Coupe I only want it with a proper VTEC powertrain, 175bhp at least & chuck out all the hybrid rubbish that just adds weight and cost. |
What have they done to the purity of the concept? |
zeroboost 01-13-2010 |
Comparing the production version to the concept, they have made a total mess of the rear, turning it into an ugly mass of conflicting bits and pieces, looking like the old Megane. Gone is the purity of line and form, replaced by jarring, unrelated shapes and intersections - it looks like a parts bin special that has been cobbled together. How could they get it so wrong? The front overhang has been increased, probably for a crumple zone and is less badly done. Rear ends are always a difficult area to design and very few cars look good from behind but the cocept was so good that it deserved to go into production with as little change as possible, maybe a very slight deepening of the rear quarter windows for practical purposes but definitely not those tail lights and the awkward shapes to the rear quarters - very, very disappointing and a wasted opportunity to produce something really different to the humdrum. |
Article | Image gallery (16) | Specifications | User Comments (2) |
All Cars - Contact us - Privacy Statement - Top | © 1998 - 2024 Ultimatecarpage.com |