Honda CR-Z vs Subaru BRZ: specs side by side
Quick comparison from catalog data - no editorial review of this pair yet.
Honda · 2010–2016
CR-Z
- Power
- 90–97 kW122–132 PS
- Top speed
- -
- Kerb mass
- -
Subaru · 2021–present
BRZ ZD8
- Power
- 173 kW235 PS
- Top speed
- 225 km/h
- Kerb mass
- 1,350 kg
At a glance
Who suits what, worked out from the catalog figures of the versions above.
Categories won: CR-Z 1 BRZ ZD8 0
- Running costs CR-Z Fuel per year: €1,860 vs €2,310 (estimated)
- Off-road Too close to call Drive and body: Front-wheel drive · Coupe vs Rear-wheel drive · Coupe
In plain words
At 15,000 km a year, fuel would cost about €1,860 (Honda CR-Z), €2,310 (Subaru BRZ) (estimated). Honda CR-Z is the older design (from 2010); Subaru BRZ arrived in 2012. Subaru BRZ is still in production; Honda CR-Z is not. On the catalog figures, the Honda CR-Z is the pick for running costs. Our catalog has no kerb mass for the Honda CR-Z yet, so some checks above leave it out.
Full specifications
| Honda CR-Z | Subaru BRZ | |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
| Version | 1.5 L 4 cyl Manual 6-spd · 2016 (EPA) · hybrid | BRZ ZD8 · 2.4 · petrol · 173 kW (235 PS) |
| Production years | 2010–2016 | 2021–present |
| Body | Coupe | Coupe |
| Class | No data | Sports car |
| Country | Japan | Japan |
| Performance | ||
| Power Why it matters: More power means stronger acceleration and easier overtaking, especially with a full load. | 90–97 kW (122–132 PS) 121–130 hp | 173 kW (235 PS) 232 hp Better |
| Power, all versions | 90–97 kW (122–132 PS) 121–130 hp | 147–173 kW (200–235 PS) 197–232 hp |
| Torque Why it matters: Torque is the pulling force you feel when accelerating from low revs, towing or climbing hills. | No data | 250 Nm 184 lb-ft |
| Top speed Why it matters: Top speed hints at how relaxed the car is at motorway speeds, even if you never reach it. | No data | 225 km/h 140 mph |
| Power per tonne | No data | 128 kW/t 156 hp/ton calculated |
| Engine and transmission | ||
| Fuel | Hybrid | Petrol |
| Engine | 1,500 cc · 4 cyl 1.5 l | 2,387 cc 2.4 l |
| Engine code | No data | FA24 |
| Gearbox | 6-speed manual | No data |
| Drive | Front-wheel drive | Rear-wheel drive |
| Dimensions and weight | ||
| Kerb weight Why it matters: A lighter car is usually more agile and uses less energy. | No data | 1,350 kg 2,976 lb |
| Economy and running costs | ||
| Fuel consumption Why it matters: Lower consumption cuts running costs and CO₂ emissions on every trip. | 7.1 l/100 km 33.1 mpg US Better | 8.8 l/100 km 26.7 mpg US |
| CO₂ | No data | 200 g/km |
| Fuel cost per year | €1,860/year estimated Better | €2,310/year estimated |
| Safety | ||
| Euro NCAP | ★★★★★ (2010) | No data |
These cars do not differ in the data we have.
Equal rows hidden (2): Body, Country.
Better marks the stronger figure - only for measurable specs (power, torque, 0–100 km/h, consumption, boot, weight).
Estimated at 15,000 km a year with fuel at €1.75/l petrol.