Published at CarReview.com
Back in the early 1990s when I was a few years away from my first driver’s license, one of the hottest cars you could own was the tiny little 1991 Honda CRX Si in yellow. It was small, quick and had an obnoxiously loud paint job that called attention to itself wherever it was. I’d sit in the back seat of my parents’ car as they chauffeured me to and from school, fogging up the window as I gawked at that yellow CRX which was always parked in some lucky guy’s driveway. I saved every waking cent until the day I was old enough to drive and flush enough to buy my own yellow CRX. It never happened. By the time I had enough money, my tastes had changed, and the CRX had morphed into the less desirable Del Sol.
But with the creation of the CRX, Honda had struck a chord with millions of consumers. It was a subcompact that had a look all its own and impressive performance numbers for its day in both acceleration and fuel efficiency. Fast forward 20 years past the fuel guzzling SUV era, and wouldn’t you know it, subcompacts are once again de rigueur. Auto manufacturers have to figure out a way to meet the impending 35 mpg corporate fleet average by 2016, and fuel sipping subcompacts are the way for them to get there, hence the barrage of new subcompacts from every manufacturer.
Honda has harkened the cries of CRX fans everywhere and introduced the new CR-Z, which is aimed to have the looks and sportiness of the original CRX combined with the hybrid efficiency of the new Insight. Mazda has taken its ‘gram’ strategy of cutting unnecessary fat everywhere possible to create a subcompact weighing a mere 2280 pounds, the lightest car in this comparo by an incredible 300 pounds. Ford has finally employed its strategy of a global platform and brought the wildly successful European Fiesta to the States, the first time a Fiesta has been sold on US soil since 1980.
Each of these subcompacts comes from a unique perspective, and concurrently, their redeeming qualities attract a unique buyer. We firmly believe that every car on the road today is ideal for someone, so rather than ranking these micro machines from first to last, this review will show which car appeals to which buyer the most. Because really, all three are terrific machines in their own respect, each with unique attributes that appeal to totally different consumers.
Mazda Mazda2
Blings:
- Featherweight
- As fun to drive as a go kart
- Fuel efficient and practical
Dings:
- Choppy ride
- Spartan interior
- Freeway harshness
Ruling: The modern day CRX, except with five doors.
For those who are looking for one of the most fuel efficient and practical subcompacts available, but don’t want to sacrifice the thrill and enjoyment of driving, look no further than the Mazda2. Of the three subcompacts, and all subcompacts on the market for that matter, no other car delivers as much fun per dollar than this little five-door hatchback. Mazda’s strategy with the 2 was quite simple – shave every unnecessary pound off the car in the quest for fuel efficiency and handling prowess. And as Mazda always does, their mantra of “Zoom-Zoom” comes through in even their smallest, most compact machine.
The Mazda2 is the modern day CRX, but it has what the CRX of yore lacks – five doors and a functional rear seat. And at only 150 pounds heavier than the CRX Si, the Mazda2 is a remarkable achievement in shedding weight. It also allows Mazda to use a smaller, more fuel-efficient 1.5L 4-cylinder that ekes out 100 horsepower and 98 lb. ft. of torque. Now those numbers might seem paltry, but when you’re moving little more than a ton of weight, it equates to respectable 0-60 time of just under 9 seconds – the fastest of the trio. And fuel efficiency-wise, the 2’s numbers are respectable, turning 28 city/35 highway with the 5-speed manual and 28/34 with a four speed automatic. Perhaps the numbers would be even higher if Mazda were to include an extra gear or two in both transaxles.
In the corners, the Mazda2 is everything that the CRX was; surefooted and eager for any winding stretch of asphalt. The car is simply a blast to drive. However, its light weight does come at a penalty of choppiness over bumps and a rather loud and harsh freeway ride. Hey, you can’t have it all.
The interior of the Mazda2 is spartan as you would expect for a base MSRP of $14,750, but like all Mazdas, the build quality and grade of plastics is very high, sharing many of the same pieces with its bigger brother Mazda3 and the MX-5 Miata. And for an as-tested price of $16,185, our Mazda2 Touring had a healthy list of features not limited to power door locks and windows, keyless entry, leather tilt steering wheel, cruise and six-speaker audio. Even the base, bare-bones Mazda2 comes with air conditioning.
It’s blatantly clear who the Mazda2 is made for; someone who wants practicality, efficiency and affordability without sacrificing the sporting feel of an iconic machine like the original CRX. If you’re the type who likes to take the back way to work, this is your ride.
Ford Fiesta SES Hatchback
Blings:
- Features galore
- Luxurious ride
- Most fuel-efficient of the three
Dings:
- Handling as lively as a corpse
- Lethargic acceleration
Ruling: The perfect subcompact for long-term highway duty.
It’s quite amazing that both the Mazda2 and the Ford Fiesta are based on the exact same platform, because they are polar opposite in the dynamics they deliver the driver. Where the Mazda2 is zippy, nimble and eager, the Fiesta is lethargic, clumsy and reluctant. However, the Fiesta delivers in areas where the Mazda can’t, namely with the most luxurious freeway ride of all three subcompacts and the highest fuel efficiency.
The Fiesta has been an overwhelming hit in Europe for decades with good reason – it offers a lot of luxury and practicality for the money. Our Lime Squeeze Metallic 5-door SES hatchback was loaded to the gills with every feature available including the Sync voice-activated system, Sirius satellite radio with premium 6-speaker audio, power door locks and windows with keyless entry, power and heated side mirrors and message center with trip computer. All for a shade under $18,000.
Not only does the Fiesta deliver a luxurious experience with its available features, but Ford NVH engineers have yet again hit another grand slam. The Fiesta is incredibly quiet and composed on the freeway; light years better than the Mazda2, but of course, the Fiesta is also 300 pounds heavier. Therefore, it’s 1.6L 120hp four-cylinder struggles to get up and go, with a 10.1 second 0-60 time, the slowest of the trio. Additionally, the Fiesta’s handling characteristics feel like they’ve been numbed to the gills with Novocain. It simply doesn’t attack the back roads like the Mazda2. It’s not even slightly motivated. The Fiesta would be far happier if you just stuck to the freeway, thank you very much.
And on the freeway is where you’ll experience the best fuel efficiency of all three cars, with the Fiesta delivering 40 mpg with the six-speed auto and 38 mpg with the 5-speed manual. It does well in the city too, offering 30 and 29 respectively.
Just like the Mazda2, it’s obvious who the Fiesta is geared towards; those who need a well-appointed, fuel efficient freeway machine that feels far more luxurious and refined than its $14,000 base MSRP sticker indicates.
Honda CR-Z
Blings:
- Attractive styling
- Every techno-geek’s dream
- Hybrid drivetrain (if you’re into that)
Dings:
- Doesn’t handle like the CRX & not as fuel-efficient as the Insight
- No rear seats
- Atrocious rear visibility
Ruling: If you sport a pocket protector and/or have a lifetime subscription to Popular Science, this is your whip.
Okay, let’s address the questions most people are asking about the CR-Z right away. No, it does not handle like the old CRX. No, its hybrid drivetrain isn’t as fuel efficient as the Insight. With that being said, it seems that Honda swung and missed completely on both counts, especially when you consider the less expensive Fit is just as fuel efficient and quicker, oh, and has double the cargo capacity.
But don’t write off the CR-Z just yet. Honda may have been mistaken trying to create a car that combines the most endearing handling features of the old CRX with the hybrid efficiency of the new Insight, but Honda has definitely nailed the interior and exterior design of the CR-Z. This machine is guaranteed to turn more heads than either the Mazda or the Ford, but be prepared to pay for it. The CR-Z starts at $19,950 and tops out at over $23K. Hey, technology ain’t cheap.
But what you get for that expense is a technological experience unlike any car in its class. The CR-Z’s interior is quite futuristic, its hybrid drivetrain features normal, econ and sport modes that challenge you to try and maximize fuel efficiency. An illuminated halo around the speedometer glows green for when you’re optimizing efficiency and turns blue when you’re wantonly wasting precious fuel. It turns even your most mundane daily commute into a fun little game. But don’t play this game on those sweltering 100+ degree days, because econ mode scales back the A/C function to optimize efficiency.
The CR-Z is the only car in this comparo with no rear seats, which can be a deal breaker for many consumers. But just like the original CRX, the CR-Z can pack away quite a bit of cargo in its rear hatch area. But perhaps the biggest downer of the CR-Z’s interior is the ridiculously poor rear window visibility. A horizontal bar runs directly across your field of vision, making for frustrating and potentially dangerous driving scenarios.
The CR-Z employs a 1.5L 115 hp gasoline engine with either a 6-speed manual (the only hybrid offering a manual) or a CVT. Sandwiched in between is a hybrid assist DC motor generating 13 hp from 84 little 1.2v nickel-metal hydride batteries for a combined output of 122 hp and 128 lb. ft. of torque. This drivetrain allows the CR-Z to do things other cars can’t – like drive 30 mph in sixth gear. Most cars would stall or lug horrifically, but the hybrid assist keeps the CR-Z rolling with no problems.
Because of the batteries, the CR-Z weighs in at a hefty 2650 pounds, resulting in a 9.6 second 0-60 time that’s one second slower than the old CRX. So you would assume then that the CR-Z more than makes up for it in fuel efficiency, right? Well, not really. Actually, the CR-Z is barely as fuel efficient as the original CRX, delivering 31 city/37 freeway with the manual and 35/39 with the CVT.
Despite the slower numbers, the CR-Z is still fun to drive. It’s not exhilarating like the old CRX or even the Mazda2 for that matter, but of the three cars, it strikes the best balance between sportiness and freeway refinement.
So the CR-Z is slower than a 20 year old CRX and less fuel efficient than its hybrid brother Insight, but it offers a completely unique driving experience. Make no mistake, the CR-Z will struggle to gain mass appeal, but for those techno-geeks who are looking for a fun-to-drive, two-seater hybrid with a six-speed manual, the CR-Z stands alone.
