Honda reaches million hybrid milestone

By David Zalstein | November 01st, 2012

FIND DEALS

Honda has reached a significant milestone, selling more than one million hybrid vehicles around the world since 1999.

Honda Australia director Stephen Collins confirmed the Japanese manufacturer achieved the million hybrid vehicle mark late last month.

“Honda is a global leader in the development of hybrid technology, having introduced hybrid motoring to the world and later to Australia with the launch of the first-generation Insight in 2001.”

Honda CR-Z - 1

Honda hybrids rely on the company’s unique Integrated Motor Assist (IMA) system to power them, combining a conventional petrol engine with an electric motor that recharges automatically via energy captured under braking.

Honda Australia’s current range of hybrid vehicles includes the Insight, Civic Hybrid and CR-Z, and will expand to four models with the launch of the new Honda Jazz Hybrid in early 2013.

In May, Toyota Motor Corporation (TMC) in Japan announced its global hybrid vehicle sales totaled four million units through April 2012 and in August, the carmaker said it was on track to sell one million hybrid vehicles worldwide for this calendar year.

Sponsored Ads

Pauly

Sigh… Honda Toyota reached this milestone long before you did. And they have been doing Hybrids for far less time.

If only the CR-Z was priced more reasonably in Australia… say a starting price of around $25,990 and topping out around the $29,990 mark. But no… you still plod along thinking your products are premium and match what Lexus and co are pumping out.
Wake up FFS!
supercujo

How many more carbons does producing that battery cost over the cost of the extra fuel?
- Zaccy16
  
  a lot, it works out better to drive a v8 range rover for a year than driving a prius!
Schn

“Honda is a global leader in the development in hybrid technology”… Are you sure about that? You know, cause like maybe there are brands called Toyota and Tesla, who are the real global leaders I think. Maybe you’ve heard of them.
- Dave W
  
  Sorry mate, but aren’t Tesla cars pure electric and not hybrid?
Dave W

Too bad the CR-Z is underpowered and overpriced. Even a DI 1.8L engine would’ve made the car more fun and justify the $35k – $40k price tag better. Actually… no, it wouldn’t. This car only cost around US$19.6k – $24k in the US. Get stuffed Honda.

No wonder I hardly see this car on the road at all despite Wheels magazine hyping it up as COTY last year.
Martin

Honda keeps persisting with their deluded idea of brand prestige in the Australian market. Unlucky for Honda that Australians have a different idea. The CRV and the Civic Hybrid are overpriced for this market and they wonder why they these 2 are underperforming. Look what happened when they repriced the Jazz, suddenly buyers were interested
- Martin
  
  Moreover, the Camry Hybrid is similar money and a class bigger (and can be had with 0% finance at the moment).
  - Guest
    
    but its a camry.
- Guest
  
  i no longer think the crv is overpriced anymore
  starting from 29k drive away for the new model with more standard gear.. that price is on par with the competitors isnt it?
  - Zaccy16
    
    yeah very good pricing now, specially when the new 10 kw more power engine arrives!
PS

Honda has done some wrong in the past, particularly around pricing. But they do make good cars that are as reliable as Toyota but with arguably better road presence.
And the amount of Honda bashing on this site is beyond ridiculous, go troll somewhere else.
- Dave W
  
  “Bashing” implies baseless accusation. Please point out which post you think is pure bashing.
  
  Honda is the only Japanese manufacturer that doesn’t have a single sporty car in Australia. No, the CR-Z is NOT a sporty car despite what Wheels mag is claiming. It’s also overpriced and as the Wheels “long termer” showed, it’s nowhere near as economical as Honda claimed.
  
  They’ve also done more wrong than just pricing. They build their once popular Civic hatchback in the UK, which makes them more expensive than they should be. And as Mazda 3 and Toyota Corolla sales number shows, it’s probably their biggest mistake.
  - sleepsy
    
    Have you driven the car? If you haven’t then your claim about it being not sporty is baseless accusation. I used to hate the CRZ as well, but a test drive changed all that. Look beyond the numbers and realise that it is great nimble car with quick steering, oversteer tendancies and instant torque from the electric boost. The car is now part of the household. Wife drives it most days but I look forward to driving it all the time. This coming from a former S2000 owner. Go troll somewhere else.
    - Dave W
      
      Even if you were right, I can buy a Toyota 86 GT, a REAL sports car for $30k and still left with an extra $5k to make it even sportier.
      
      For the $40k Luxury model, there are plenty of real sports car out there now, 3 MPS, Cooper S, WRX, even GTI are around $40k. Are you telling me that the CR-Z is the better choice out of all these cars? Please.
      
      So you used to be an S2000 owner, great car, but in this context, it means nothing other than to indicate that you’re PROBABLY a Honda fanboy.
      
      I’m not bashing Honda here. I’m sure the CR-Z is a nice car to drive, but for a car with only 91kW power output, it would have to be under a tonne to be considered sporty. As it is now, I maintain that the CR-Z is underpowered and overpriced.
      
      BTW, I’m curious, what average fuel consumption do you get from it? Or should I say your wife since you seem to be driving something else. And if you don’t mind me asking, what do you drive if your wife gets the CR-Z?
      - sleepsy
        
        Why so
        curious? I drive an Alfa GT V6 3.2 and my next car will either be a 328i with M
        sport pack, C250 coupe with sports package or wait to see if the new legend
        (Acura RLX) is any good.
        
        CRZ returns
        about 6.1L/100km.
        
        You are delusional
        thinking that any of the models you’ve listed, mainly shopping trolleys are
        “proper sports cars”. They are fantastic cars that take the wife and
        groceries home while having fun but drive any proper no frills sports car
        (S2000, Elise) and you will understand the difference.
        
        Why do you
        compare a base GT to a top spec CRZ? Bluetooth, Sat Nav, reverse camera, DVD,
        iPOD/USB, panoramic roof, 7 speed paddle, Leather heated seats, Daytime LED.
        
        Let me make
        this clear, Honda Aust have made some dreadful decisions (why no manual for top
        spec CRZ or Euro? – so do bash them, I do) but don’t go bashing this car. The
        CRZ was NEVER intended to be a sports car. It is a hybrid that is sporty. It
        operates in a totally different market place. Overpriced? it’s a hybrid, they
        are inherently more expensive. The Wheels Car of the Year criteria is about
        awarding the car that best achieves what it’s designers set out to do not which
        car will sell the most. Give credit this time to Honda Aust for actually importing a
        niche market vehicle.
        
        Finally, you
        want overpriced? Try looking for a European car that has decent power for under
        $100k. Once over the $70k bracket, and its all dealer delivery, GST and Lux
        Tax.
      - Dave W
        
        Then why did you think I’m trolling when I said Honda is the only one without a sporty car in Australia? Like you said, the CR-Z is only a hybrid that Honda made to look sporty.
        
        Why I compared it to the base GT? Because I was talking about the sporty nature of the car, not the luxury. But I wasn’t comparing it to the top line CR-Z though. If you read carefully, I said I’d still have $5k left to spend after buying the $30k GT. That makes it $35k total, which is the price of the base CR-Z.
        
        Why so curious? You did say that, and I quote, my “claim about it being not sporty is baseless accusation”. And yet, despite you claiming it to be sporty, you don’t seem to find it sporty enough to actually drive it. Instead, you gave it to your wife.
        
        My point was that for anyone looking for a sporty car around the CR-Z money, the CR-Z would be at the bottom of their list. And those cars I listed are actually more practical than the CR-Z (with the exception of the Cooper S), as well as being much faster.
        
        I forgot to mention the BMW 116i which is around $37k and RWD.
        
        Despite what you and Wheels claimed. I rarely see the CR-Z on the road. Making the best car you can is one thing, it’s another thing to make the best car that people actually WANT.
  - PS
    
    Dave, when the new Civics (hatch and sedan) were announced, already people were making comments about how they look the same and all that stuff, but not really make the same comment about the new 2013 Golf. When they dropped the price for Civic sedan, most comments posted were ‘ugly’.
    
    I don’t drive a Honda myself and I think their current offerings are geared towards the mainstream buyers… and at that, they actually have a pretty strong proposition. Out of their entire fleet, I could safely say that Accord Euro, Civic and Jazz are pretty good choices.
    CRZ’s technology demands premium, yes, and it’s not for everyone. If you look at the current trend, a lot of future sports cars have hybrid power train. Sure it’s early days and early adopters pay the price… but if a lot of people are heading that way, then Honda must be onto something.
    
    CR-Z is also a lot faster in real life than in paper, this has proven by many if you search on youtube and forums. The reason they had to downgrade the power is that power delivery dips a little when the battery isn’t in full charge – this is mainly battery management.
    - Dave W
      
      To be honest with you, I like the front design of the Civic. I think it looks better than most Japanese hatchbacks in its class. That said, I just don’t like the fat behind.
      
      This site as well as others are full of Euro snobs who completely dismiss most if not all Asian cars. So it’s not so much a “Honda bashing” as an Asian car bashing.
      
      As for the CR-Z, even if you forget about the performance, it’s still an overpriced car, much like most imported cars here. The fact that it claims to be sporty despite the 91kW power just makes it more glaringly obvious.
      
      As for the power, there’s no such thing as “they had to downgrade because…”. Mugen managed to add a supercharger, boosting the power to around 140kW.
      
      I actually love the way the CR-Z looks. I just think it’s a wasted opportunity with that powertrain inside. It’s fine in Japan or USA where it’s sold at a much cheaper price. You can buy it and boost it with aftermarket mods. Not here though.
      
      As I said, people who want sporty cars would look elsewhere and people who want practicality would also look elsewhere, some can even be found in those sportier cars.
      
      Honda Australia should’ve realised who the competitions are when they set the price of the CR-Z, they’re arrogant if they think they can compete. It should’ve been priced closer to the Veloster than the likes of GTI/WRX/MPS/etc.
      - PS
        
        I can’t argue with you regarding CR-Z pricing, it should be around 25-27k… That’s Honda Australia’s deluded thinking that it could slot in where Civic Type R was in terms of market and price range, and I think they are copping it.
      - sleepsy
        
        Dave,
        
        What makes you think I gave the car to my wife? She earns enough money to buy her own car and decided on the CRZ before I gave it a chance.
        
        Such comments indicate that your logic is based on assumptions, just like your knowledge (or lack of) cars.
        
        My original point stands. Your claim that the car is not sporty enough is baseless, as you have never driven the car. So you bash this car just as Euro snobs bash Asian cars. Poor form.
        
        Overpriced? The car isn’t cheap compared to say the 86, but the 86 is a game changer and has made every car seem over priced. Kudos to Toyota and Subaru. But try buying a Golf GTI with the same level of equipment as the CRZ Luxury and it will set you back over $50k drive away. We could use this saving a buy a Mugen supercharger and get similar performance figures. $40k for a GTI you say? that’s not even drive away let alone metallic paint. Perhaps you should actually go shopping at the dealers to find the real price rather than just read about stuff online.
        
        You are a troll that just keeps coming back.
      - Dave W
        
        Mate, I tried to explain what I like and don’t like. A troll would just come in here and say it sucks or fail or whatever words they use these days.
        
        Your original point stands because you completely missed my point, which is, for $35k to $40k (before on road) price of the Sports and Luxury variant, it’s the least sporty out of all the other choices.
        
        I gave you several examples before, Mazda 3 SP25 ($31k), MPS ($39.5k), Cooper S ($40k), WRX ($40k), GTI ($40.5k), BMW 116i ($37k).
        
        All before on road price, all sportier and faster than the CR-Z, AND more practical, except for the Cooper S.
        
        And once again, I’m NOT talking about the luxury nature of the cars, I was only talking about their sporty nature so all that talk about level of equipment is moot point. But so you know, Veloster SR Turbo gives you even more equipment for less.
        
        Let’s face it mate, you’re only here to justify having that car in your garage, which I must say is perfectly adequate for your missus. But not for you, right? That’s why you drive a V6 Alfa. And even if you have $40k to spend, I really doubt the CR-Z would be your first choice as a sporty car. lol
        
        And please don’t say it would be, because we both know that’s BS. No way the CR-Z is sporty enough for someone looking at the 328i with M sports pack for his future car .
Adam

Oh Honda!! It WAS such a great car company. IMO The Accord Euro is the only vehicle they have that’s semi-appealing. Jazz is a mini van, Civic is a mess including that woefully designed interior, new CRV is about 12 months overdue and the CR-Z, well, sales show it’s not great. This is my opinion. I’m not trolling. I just wish Honda made some great vehicles again, with amazing styling! They’re capable of doing it but choose not to for some odd reason.
- PS
  
  They will, once they have enough cash reserve. Sports cars are not volume sellers but they are important for the brand’s image. They are learning though, a lot of sporty models will be released from 2014 onwards, including Civic Type R, NSX and Honda S2000 rumoured successor (could be smaller and cheaper, like the Honda Beat).
  
  CR-Z is way too expensive, I agree… look at carsales and you’ll see a lot of them selling for way less than RRP. I think the dealers would be pressuring Honda for an official price drop soon.
qikturbo

The year 1999,when Honda decided to “flip the bird” to long time Honda enthusiasts!

Car Advice

Honda reaches million hybrid milestone

Sponsored Ads

Advanced Options