|
|
|
|
 |
jero
 |
|
I'm just going to do this every month as a FYI. I will also include avg gas prices in the US (price is actually for the end of the month with recorded sales), and total new US inventory according to cars.com.
We'll see if there are any trends with gas prices/availability/weather/or ???
CR-Z sales summary:
2010
August - 694 (7 days)
September - 1276
October - 1419
November - 1024
December - 876
2011
January - 894
February - 1091
March - 1,685
April - 1,819
May. - 1557
June - 966
July - 878
August - 745
September - 537
October - 289
November - 305
December - 564 ($3.26)
2012
January - 363 ($3.42)
February - 466 ($3.72)
March - 536 ($3.90/gal, Cars.com = 847 available)
2010 monthly avg... 1322
2011 monthly avg... 944
2012 monthly avg... 455
|
Colin
|
|
|
I was thinking of leasing another CR-Z but the rates or residuals must have changed drastically. With the same down, my payments would have gone to ~$365+tax. Currently we're at $275 including tax. It's actually a great car at what we're paying... less so at the current rate.
|
Ganplosive
|
|
Thanks Jero, this'll help keep the discussions on track.
*fingers crossed* COME ON CR-Z. lolol
|
jero
|
|
Could be residuals...
A quick cars.com search shows:
2011 EX w/6sp and 3k miles for $16.8k ($21.9k new)
2011 EX w/cvt and 6k miles for $16.9k ($22.5k new)
|
jero
|
|
Additional FYI:
The Veloster:
nov '11... 2538
dec '11... 2188
jan '12... 1693
feb '12... 3240
march '12... 3848
veloster in 5 months... 13,507
CR-Z in 19 months... 17,984
|
Hondarulez
|
|
|
veloster..? huh???? isn't the veloster a totally different vehicle? more doors...more seats....quite a bit bigger...etc...non-hybrid??
|
sugaki
|
|
To me the sales of the Veloster is a clear indication of Honda having lost it in so many ways.
Don't get me wrong, I drove the Veloster for awhile and it's a crappy car. Bad suspension tuning, hopelessly numb engine response, mediocre fuel economy. But it's the concept, the idea and the passion behind it that sells.
The CR-Z is a joke. There's nothing overtly wrong with it--it's kinda Fit-like in handling, sips fuel, is a bit low on power but has peppy tip-in. But the whole car just screams conservative, limp and designed by committee. It's as though top brass said "hey, let's not get *too* crazy" with this car, and it shows.
I actually had people coming up to me complimenting the Veloster... would never get that in a CR-Z.
|
Varmint
|
|
sugaki wrote:
... would never get that in a CR-Z.
|
I do. Often enough that I have a whole routine I go through.
|
Varmint
|
|
|
There's no need to track it, but weather is another factor. People buy more SUVs and AWD vehicles in the cold weather. Sporty cars sells better when the weather is warm. This is especially true with convertibles, but, to a lesser extent, it applies to all sporty cars.
|
jero
|
|
Can you imagine if Honda made the veloster with the element jump door, a true honda suspension, then after 6 months announced they were going turbo?
|
CarPhreakD
|
|
|
Unfortunately, while the CR-Z has its problems, the Veloster is a complete piece of shit. The reviews and reactions by folks on the internet is pretty funny- but that won't matter to "normal" car owners.
|
Ganplosive
|
|
|
wait are we seriously putting the Veloster as a competitor to the CR-Z? why don't we add the versa yaris and fit as well?
|
montechester
|
|
|
I predict Veloster sales will tank after those that are attracted by the funky styling already have one. Once the car has to start selling on its other merits, it will be in trouble. Only caveat there is IF Hyundai can fix the many issues that plague the car right now along with the Turbo, then they may be able to reinvigorate sales. Hyundai is certainly getting better at fixing issues as running changes, so we'll just have to wait and see.
|
CarPhreakD
|
|
montechester wrote:
I predict Veloster sales will tank after those that are attracted by the funky styling already have one. Once the car has to start selling on its other merits, it will be in trouble. Only caveat there is IF Hyundai can fix the many issues that plague the car right now along with the Turbo, then they may be able to reinvigorate sales. Hyundai is certainly getting better at fixing issues as running changes, so we'll just have to wait and see.
|
I've never understood that. "Wait for the turbo", as if a power increase will fix everything that is wrong with the Veloster. At the price range the turbo is likely to be in, you can also look at alternatives like the Civic Si, GTI and Fiat 500 Abarth for your hot compact fix, all cars that most people would likely buy over the Veloster. Considering the shockingly poor 0-60 and 1/4 mile times the Veloster has been posting on the internet (i.e. lower than the CR-Z's, and with less average FE to boot), the turbo might still not make the car competitive with the Si/GTi/Abarth group in a straight line.
|
iahs2k
|
|
|
CR-Zzzzzz sales....HA HA....LOL!!!! If the thing had an engine that made power it would have sold. CR-Zzzzz and Crosstour need to die.
|
Longhorn
|
|
montechester wrote:
I predict Veloster sales will tank after those that are attracted by the funky styling already have one. Once the car has to start selling on its other merits, it will be in trouble. Only caveat there is IF Hyundai can fix the many issues that plague the car right now along with the Turbo, then they may be able to reinvigorate sales. Hyundai is certainly getting better at fixing issues as running changes, so we'll just have to wait and see.
|
This car sells on looks alone, also when the consumer test drives the Velostar they are either ignorant or do not care about its percieved failings.
|
rev2damoon
|
|
Longhorn wrote:
montechester wrote:
I predict Veloster sales will tank after those that are attracted by the funky styling already have one. Once the car has to start selling on its other merits, it will be in trouble. Only caveat there is IF Hyundai can fix the many issues that plague the car right now along with the Turbo, then they may be able to reinvigorate sales. Hyundai is certainly getting better at fixing issues as running changes, so we'll just have to wait and see.
|
This car sells on looks alone, also when the consumer test drives the Velostar they are either ignorant or do not care about its percieved failings.
|
But it's so....ugly....IMO of course.
|
Varmint
|
|
Longhorn wrote:
This car sells on looks alone, also when the consumer test drives the Velostar they are either ignorant or do not care about its percieved failings.
|
It has three solid things going for it: looks, electronics, and price.
Then it has several paper advantages: fuel economy, rear seats, and performance. In the real world, none of these advantages ring true. But hype is king. This car should be getting a bashing even worse than the CR-Z, but Hyundai has been good with their marketing and they're the fashionable under dog at the moment.
The CR-Z has looks, fuel economy, handling, acceleration, and braking in its favor. But even though the CR-Z is the better car, it doesn't have hype. In fact, it got negative press simply because the US market wanted a different kind of car.
I expect the CR-Z will remain unchanged here in NA. Honda is not going to toss good money after bad. There will be no Si variant. It will not get an extensive equipment list. The IMA will not get an upgrade to the Civic's Lithium package or any new ED technologies. There will be no attempts at marketing the car. Mostly because Americans never take a second look at things. (Other markets will get this stuff.) Once buyers here make up their minds about a car, only a full redesign can fix a perception problem. Even then, it takes several years.
|
Hondarulez
|
|
|
I believe the CR-Z is doing fine in other markets......so I also doubt the CR-Z is going anywhere......it's good to lift the overall fleet mpg thing up.
|
crx-man
|
|
Putting crap on Veloster and closing eyes over CR-Z's shortcomings won't help. Let's face it, Honda disappointed everyone with the powertrain. This is not a perception, this is just a sheer fact. Yes, the handling is great. But when you feel like pushing the car out of a turn because there's no acceleration, it just suxx. Plus here in Europe, it's so overpriced that it's just sitting on the lots. In my country they had to give 10k USD discount (yes, 10k) to get rid of the inventory - then, these cars moved fast. Honda Europe is actually way worse than Honda US in marketing, pricing, trim level specs etc. And if you're complaining about "not giving second chances" - well, if you blow your first impression, it's kinda natural it's difficult to improve it.
BTW the top version of CR-Z was only 1.5k USD shy of Civic Type R. Real wonder it was not selling when it hit the market.
Regarding Veloster, it has 3 doors, can seat 4 and has tons of gadgets. It's not aimed at track testers, it's aimed at students. Handling is really poor but for the target audience, it's good enough. On the other hand, CR-Z was disappointing. Everyone expected EE8 heritage in new package but Honda failed to deliver this. It's like if FT86 turns out with 2.5 150 hp engine - would you also blame the public for lacking enthusiasm?
|
jero
|
|
Rear seats are a "paper advantage?"
|
Varmint
|
|
jero wrote:
Rear seats are a "paper advantage?"
|
To anyone who's sat in them.
|
Hondarulez
|
|
crx-man wrote:
Putting crap on Veloster and closing eyes over CR-Z's shortcomings won't help. Let's face it, Honda disappointed everyone with the powertrain. This is not a perception, this is just a sheer fact. Yes, the handling is great. But when you feel like pushing the car out of a turn because there's no acceleration, it just suxx. Plus here in Europe, it's so overpriced that it's just sitting on the lots. In my country they had to give 10k USD discount (yes, 10k) to get rid of the inventory - then, these cars moved fast. Honda Europe is actually way worse than Honda US in marketing, pricing, trim level specs etc. And if you're complaining about "not giving second chances" - well, if you blow your first impression, it's kinda natural it's difficult to improve it.
BTW the top version of CR-Z was only 1.5k USD shy of Civic Type R. Real wonder it was not selling when it hit the market.
Regarding Veloster, it has 3 doors, can seat 4 and has tons of gadgets. It's not aimed at track testers, it's aimed at students. Handling is really poor but for the target audience, it's good enough. On the other hand, CR-Z was disappointing. Everyone expected EE8 heritage in new package but Honda failed to deliver this. It's like if FT86 turns out with 2.5 150 hp engine - would you also blame the public for lacking enthusiasm?
|
Putting crap on Veloster and closing eyes over CR-Z's shortcomings won't help. But putting crap on CR-Z and closing eyes over Veloster's shortcomings isn't a good idea either, right?
Problem is, Honda never intended to make the CR-Z to be a replacement of the CR-X....let alone a sports car. It's purely a niche vehicle and let's face it, not many people would be interested in one. If you insist on making comparisons with other vehicles, then its closest competitors would be cars like Renault Twingo, Mini Cooper, Suzuki Swift, etc. The CR-Z performs remarkably well against those cars in real world mpg and on the track (from Best Motoring).
|
jero
|
|
I've sat in them, and more importantly I've had kids sit in there, which is what most people would use them for.
They are more than adequate for short trips, and totally fine for kids that are not 175#s.
I agree it is a niche vehicle, it is just too bad Honda is pouring so much money into the niche and ignoring the masses.
|
crx-man
|
|
|
Here in Europe, CR-Z has the rear seats.
|
crx-man
|
|
Hondarulez wrote:
Putting crap on Veloster and closing eyes over CR-Z's shortcomings won't help. But putting crap on CR-Z and closing eyes over Veloster's shortcomings isn't a good idea either, right?
Problem is, Honda never intended to make the CR-Z to be a replacement of the CR-X....let alone a sports car. It's purely a niche vehicle and let's face it, not many people would be interested in one. If you insist on making comparisons with other vehicles, then its closest competitors would be cars like Renault Twingo, Mini Cooper, Suzuki Swift, etc. The CR-Z performs remarkably well against those cars in real world mpg and on the track (from Best Motoring).
|
Where exactly do I put crap on CR-Z? And my critic of Veloster's handling is closing eyes over its shortcomings in what universe? I only stated facts - you may not like them but that will not change them.
To your points: sorry, but Honda named CR-Z close enough to CRX, the shape of the car is clearly modern interpretation of CRX and Honda was raving about inspiration by the likes of Lotus when it comes to handling. Oh sure, that's clearly a niche vehicle with no connection to CRX...
Second, you really make me laugh when you put Twingo, Cooper and Swift in one sentence as "competitors". Twingo costs about a half of what does CR-Z cost and the same is with Swift. Well, CR-Z does outhandle them both but is it really surprising that it is not enough to pay double?
Mini Cooper is from completely different planet, not that it's remarkably great in any way with exception of S version, but people just will not pay the same money for Honda, just like they don't pay the same money for Accord and BMW 5 although they're pretty much the same size. And those who want a fast version can get Cooper S or JCW which are above in price but they offer substantially more in every way - there's no CR-Z Si not even thinking of Type R.
Don't get me wrong, I like CR-Z, I've driven it several times and I've driven it on the circuit, too. But the drivetrain is just nothing exciting, the car is - just like Veloster - great for commuting. On the track, batteries are out in about 1 minute (1 km long twisty kart circuit) and the rest of your stint, you're just dragging extra weight. Redline is too low to raise adrenaline. I was thinking of buying one when the 10k discount came to have a commuter car that is economic on the way to work and fun when I get outside city but finally didn't. And for the record, I will not buy Veloster, either. But I do understand why others do pick it over CR-Z because they're getting pretty much what they want. Honda has screwed the package in CR-Z because commuter target audience will not appreciate nor pay for extra handling and more sporty oriented buyer will not tolerate unexciting performance. Honda just should have kept the hybrid for Civic and put NA into CR-Z or make the hybrid with different engine to give it proper sporty punch.
|
Varmint
|
|
I think we're mixing and matching too many markets, here. Yes, other markets get the rear bench. And while there is no Si or Type R to compete with the Cooper S or turbo Veloster, there is a Mugen iCF which is showing up on dealer lots already.
Getting back to North America...
I agree that the car is clearly CRX-inspired. And I think that inspiration caused Americans to wax nostalgic about the Si variant, while completely forgetting the HF and base models. This resulted in expectations that an IMA drivetrain can't live up to. Not at a $20K price point and not with the current IMA system.
Several auto rags have gone back and retested the CR-Z. After getting over their judgments based on paper specs or first drives, the reviews are more realistic. When viewed against actual competition (instead of the golden halo of the CRZ Si, or the RSX-S, or the hole where the S2000 and Prelude once sat) the CR-Z does quite well. Some have recognized their initial knee-jerk views on the CR-Z, as Motor Trend did when they compared it with real cars, instead of their pipe dreams. The theme runs through the entire section on the CR-Z. There's five paragraphs and three of them reference the error of the early judgments:
The CR-Z has taken its lumps for not being the exact CR-X incarnate die-hards wanted...
Between the weak-on-paper hybrid powertrain and the lack of seating, we predicted a mid-pack finish at best. After climbing out of it, though, some were clamoring for it to win.
Like so many vehicles before it, the CR-Z got a bum rap because it didn't meet everyone's preconceived notions of what it should be.
While I agree that Honda should have offered, or at least promised, an Si version from the get-go, it's not like the current model is pokey. In that comparison, the CR-Z beats cars that have a 50 hp advantage and never allows the Mini to get more than .2 seconds ahead.
I truly believe the promise of an Si version would have prevented the negativity printed at launch. (I suspect Honda was sensitive about stepping on the toes of the upcoming Civic Si.) Instead of articles ending with "this car is half-baked and needs x,y,z" those same articles would have ended with "this is a solid start and we can't wait for what comes next." The car is not the problem. The CR-Z is better than almost every other base competitor in the US market. The expectations and poor market recognition were the problem.
|
jero
|
|
So... the million dollar question is:
Why doesn't Honda build what people want, when other manufacturers seem to be striving to do just that? Veloster turbo, GTI, Golf-R, 1 series, BRZ/FR-S, mini cooper supercharged, 500 abarth, etc... to name a few.
It's just a shame IMO, that Honda refuses to have a true lightweight sportscar... not a sport-y car. Would it really kill Honda to give us something in the vein of Lotus that can carry on the S2000 torch?
|
Varmint
|
|
Yeah, I have no idea. Unless it's a core model like the Civic or Accord, Honda tends to let lackluster models wither and die. MMCs for models like the Crosstour and RDX have been minimal when the vehicles needed a significant makeover. This does not give me great hope for the CR-Z.
In the UK, Honda released the Mugen iCF model. To some, this is a favorable omen. To me, it suggests that Honda is not going to make powertrain changes at the factory.
Personally, I wouldn't buy a supercharged CR-Z. While I would love to stomp the throttle coming out of a turn every once in a while, I also enjoy averaging 44 mpg on daily basis. My preferences aside, I do think the car needs a halo model to help bolster sales of the "base" version.
|
jero
|
|
I agree with everything you said... save the mpgs.
I just filled my S2000 up at 4.28/ga, yet I still hit redline every trip out and enjoy it to the fullest :)
I agree Honda is going to do nothing with the CR-Z. Maybe they will boost the battery by 7hp or something minimal, but that is it for probably the next 4-5 years. By then, all the other manufacturers will be a generation ahead on cheap pocket rocket fun.
|
|
|
| |
|
| Thread Page - [1] 2 |
| |
|
![[home]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/home.gif){kind=small}
![[rumors and news]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/rumors.gif){kind=small}
![[model release matrix]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/newmodelreleasematrix.gif){kind=small}
![[dealer network]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/dealernet.gif){kind=small}
![[desktop calendar]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/calendar.gif){kind=small}
![[exhaust notes]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/exhaust.gif){kind=small}
![[tov forums]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/forums.gif){kind=small}
![[links]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/links.gif){kind=small}
![[search]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/search.gif){kind=small}
![[sponsors]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/sponsors.gif){kind=small}
![[garage]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/garage.gif){kind=small}
![[login]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/login.gif){kind=small}
