Honda's saving the CRX for a rainy day. (sarcasm)

Most people who know something about cars say it'll never happen again. Even though there are probably a bunch of us who would buy it and think it was really cool, it just wouldn't qualify as safe by todays standards.

Think about what happens to pretty much any compact when it gets in an accident with truck or SUV. The truck does not get hurt, at all, and the car needs like 500 to $3000 or more in repairs.

 

not sure if you are familar but the 1g CRX had a rear beam suspension too just like the Fit

 

i beg to differ, the insight seems to be a spot on replacement for the crx, excluding the Si, but never the less there are more cominalities than differences.

 

why do you say that?

 

I would agree that the insight is very dissimilar to the CRX. Compared to the latest/greates CRX, the 1991 CRX Si - since everyone who's screaming "bring back the CRX" really doesn't care about the lesser models - the Insight comes up short.

The Insight has anemic acceleration (only 73 hp from the 1.0L 3-cylinder and electric motor, combined, vs. 108hp for the CRX, 11.2 sec 0-60 vs. 8.7). Less storage than the CRX (16.3 cubic feet vs. 23.2 cubic feet). It's too expensive for a tiny econo-car ($19,330-21,530 msrp, vs. $15,000 for the Fit- about what a modern CRX should sell for). It has unsatisfying, artificial-feeling brakes due to regenerative braking. The somewhat "floppy" handling - hurt by the tiny 165/65SR-14 tires vs. the CRXs 185/60/14s - doesn't have any of the great "tossable" feel of the CRX.

What it does have in common - very similar styling, curb weight around 2000 pounds - doesn't make up for what it lacks in the performance department. The insight targets a completely different audience than the CRX did. You could argue that it is almost a direct replacement for the old CRX HF - but who cares about the HF?

 

it is a direct replacement for the HF, i know 3 HF owners who finally sold their hf's for the insight.

not everyone is in it for the speed or performance.

 

you're talking mainly about performance, and you're absolutely right. but no one said that the insight was comparable performance wise, especially to the CRX Si. when the CRX first came out in america, the frighteningly high fuel economy was just as important (if not moreso) than the "tossable feel" of the car.

 

im not sure how a 2 door hatchback can be impratical, as suggested earlier. Having the hatchback alone makes it more useful than say a prelude or civic coupe. The hatch makes that large trunk area-like the integra or even audi tt-theres a lot of room back there.
I think it wouldn't be rock bottom cheap, but they could make one light and relatively safe if they wanted.... but why when the fit, civic si, s2000 and the maybe new acura coupe(tsx?) all would suffer in sales. Both people looking for economy and performance have their options cut out for them... so theres no reason for honda to make another vehicle that would just take away from what they have. I think honda will make one , maybe 5-10 years as we see the auto industry begin to scope out alternative energy and different concepts in transporation.

 

btw, autoweek seemed pretty sure that their "spies" have found out a new CRX will come for 2007, not that theyve ever been particularly reliable