rockville

First head to head comparison and Alice has once again made an ass of himself.

WolfpackS2k

Look how massive the nose is on that car? Totally out of proportion. You can't have a huge front overhang and no rear overhang without any negative design consequences.

Dr. WOT

Steponme

The MB is the slowest car in there and probably the heaviest, and probably up to 50% heavier than the CR-Z. The day I'd believe that such a heavy and slow sedan is more fun than a small, tossable coupe is the day I'd stop posting on here. It's also the day I'd believe a Lexus LS430 is more fun than the Miata.

Well, this U.S. publication begs to differ with that review (regarding the CR-Z's handling): http://www.roadandtrack.com/tests/car/u.s....2011-honda-cr-z

Malloric

And you've driven neither of them. The opinion of whoever wrote the article is that the MB E200 CDI was more fun. Right, wrong? It's an opinion. Regardless, a lot of people, myself included, have been saying wait for the comparisons. And there you have it. Less fun than a E200 CDI. It's not exactly the comparison I was expecting, and it's only one, so it should be taken with a rather large grain of salt.

I also don't get "turns in crisply" with "noticeable understeer at turn-in". To me, that's mutually exclusive. A car can turn in crisply at turn-in and have understeer at the limit, but it can't turn in crisply while understeering at turn-in.

Point is, for me both articles are short on detail, short on explanation, and suspect as far as I'm concerned. I also find it hard to believe that the CR-Z is less fun than a E200 diesel, but then the definition of fun ranges. I'm sure there are many people who have more fun in their LS430 than they would in a Miata. They're definition of fun is just vastly different than yours or mine.