Why did it die, /o/?

>>16442618
Because Honda put the wrong powertrain in it.

>>16442618
it offered nothing over the Civic Coupe

They're conceptualizing a turbo version without the CVT and hybrid tech.

Imagine buying a car about as fuel efficient/practical/expensive/heavy/small as a BRZ, except

>less power
>less sporty
>not as good looking
>FWD
>no LSD
>no "muh drivers car purity" feels

Should've had a twinturbo C32. Electric boost to gasoline power. And been RWD.

>>16442643
Should've shared more with the Civic like the original CRX with the hybrid electro-shit as an optional(maybe free) package. Plus an SI version would've helped it some. The original CRX was successful because it was smaller, cheaper, and compatible with the plethora of parts and aftermarket that available from the regular civic. It could simultaneously be one of the sportiest cars Honda made and also one of the most efficient and cheap depending on it's drivetrain and tuning - the CR-Z tread the midway point there in the most mediocre way for a higher price tag and that's why it sold so horribly.

http://www.goodcarbadcar.net/2011/01/honda-cr-z-sales-figures.html
It hasn't sold over a thousand units a month since May of 2011. That's depressingly bad for something that had that much potential.

Honda needs to smarten up, they're following Toyotes on the road to perdition but they don't have the Hebrew Aurium to make it work

honda didn't listen to literally everyone