Review: Why Honda’s ZR-V hybrid SUV is a good car, but not a great car
The new Honda ZR-V, which sits between the larger CR-V and the smaller HR-V
I often wonder if some carmakers are too cautious, too reserved. They can have all the components for a really good car but choose to clothe them in conservatism.
Honda’s latest hybrid offering, the ZR-V, is a case in point, I think. It potentially has a lot going for it, but it seldom manages to cross the line.
The ZR-V is heavily based on the Civic (one of the most underrated cars on the road) and that means the engineers and designers had everything they could have wished for to produce an outstanding example of what a petrol electric hybrid should look like, and do, at this point in time.
They didn’t. So we must proceed on the basis that the car is a good one, not a great one.
The new SUV sits between the larger CR-V (on which it is also based in part) and the smaller HR-V, and goes some, but by no means all, of the way to doing something different for a family wanting an enlivened drive.
Arguably handling is its biggest attribute, thanks to Civic-based underpinnings tuned for the larger body.
It is not the most attractive looking crossover, especially from the rear. I don’t know if it would have cost that much more to jazz it up a bit. A little would have worked wonders. The front isn’t a scene-stealer, either, when you consider what some of the opposition have conjured from their design programmes.
Technologically speaking, Honda has always had something fresh to offer. This hybrid reflects that – because the two-litre petrol engine, motors and a battery interplay differently than most other rivals.
The engine acts most of the time as an on-board supply of power for the electric motor, which directly drives the wheels. The engine only does so at motorway speeds. The rest of the time, around town or in traffic, it’s the electric motor that does the work. It means you get mostly electric car driving without having to worry about range (57-litre petrol tank). Nissan has a similar set-up.
There are, additionally, three drive modes: normal, sport, econ, snow. Sport gave it a bit of an edge, with the result that the eight-second trip from zero to 100kmh felt quicker. On the move, the response was always good – especially when in electric-only mode.
While it is smaller than the CR-V, it manages to find decent space via a long wheelbase: it is 1,840mm wide, has a 2,657mm wheelbase, is 4,568mm long and 1,620mm tall. There was no problem whatsoever with two adults or three smaller passengers across the back. And it was easy to get in and out.
Arguably, handling is its biggest attribute, thanks to Civic-based underpinnings tuned for the larger body. There was barely noticeable body-roll even on twisty roads – a real achievement and a boon for those prone to car sickness.
Much of my driving involved motorway journeys, so the engine was working overtime as far as the normal mix of driving would be concerned. Honda claims 5.7/5.8 litres/100km, but I calculated 5.5/litres – it is rare for a test drive to better the official figures.
There are three trim levels: Elegance, Sport and Advance. I had the latter, which had leather upholstery, premium audio, 12 Bose speakers and a panoramic glass roof. They helped lift what would otherwise have been a more functional look to the cabin. The centre-dash small digital infotainment screen didn’t help on that front either. It looked old-fashioned, but it was simple to use and there were tactile buttons to make changing volume on the radio more straightforward. Rivals, please copy.
The “body-stabilising” seating was claimed to reduce fatigue, but it didn’t suit me. There was a lack of lumbar support. I wasn’t mad about the low-down seating either. I had to use every bit of the electric adjustment to get to a reasonably commanding driving position. Materials and plastics were of good quality and the padded areas on the doors, central console and dash gave a welcome touch of luxury.
Boot space was below class-average: at 370-litres, it was 100-litres smaller than the Qashqai. But you can expand the 370 capacity to 866-litres by flat-folding the back seats.
A glance at the rivals in the market underlines why I felt it was a pity Honda didn’t go further with design, cabin, centre-screen display and boot space. As well as the Qashqai, competitors include the Ford Kuga, Renault Austral, Mazda CX-5, Toyota CH-R , KIA Sportage and Hyundai Tucson. Big challengers.
And the near €55,000 starting price felt a bit strong as did the Advance model on test (€59,995). However, Honda would say it more than measures up when equipment is taken into account. That is especially the case when you factor in its extensive menu of safety systems. The ZR-V is a good car without the touches of class that might have transformed it to being a great one.
Honda ZR-V Factfile
Join the Irish Independent WhatsApp channel
Stay up to date with all the latest news
