HCH I vs HCH II vs Prius

Chuck · #1 10-31-2006, 09:58 AM

I invite those that are more knowledgable on these cars to chime in.

The 2006 hybrid Civic is a excellent and selling well. In fact, it was Motor Trend's Car of the Year. From the perspective of a number of people here such as Dan, there were some tradeoffs.

In the redesign of the HCH II, the five-speed and lean burn was thrown out - not an option.

The combined FE of the latest Prius is 55mpg, the HCH II is 50mpg, the last HCH I is 48mpg.

The impression I get of the 2006 hybrid Civic from a fuel economy standpoint is "thrre steps forward - two steps back". The improvements to the engine and electric motor were greater than the loss of lean-burn and the five speed. Leads me to think the 2006 hybrid Civic might have matched the Prius' EPA 55mpg if it was an upgraded HCH I 5-speed. Did they also increase the performance on the HCH II over the HCH I?

Said this before, I understand why Honda is getting away from hybrids with manual transmissions. It's just too easy for people to lug one and deep discharge the hybrid battery pack. Even though this is the driver's fault, it's bad business for Honda not to assume responsibility, so the obvious way out is to only offer hybrids with CVT transmissions.

I love 5-speeds. I don't hate CVTs - just unfamiliar with them. I do like CVTs over fluid automatics.

I just hope Honda will be more competive with Toyota in the future. At least they are not GM.

Mr. Kite · #2 10-31-2006, 10:45 AM

The HCHI has a peak of 93HP (85 gas & 13 elec.) and the HCHII has a peak of 110HP (93 gas + 20 elec.). This is a decent increase in performance.

Just comparing the CVTs, the HCHI has a combined EPA fuel economy of 47 or 48. The HCHII has a combined EPA fuel economy of 50.

HCHI-MT vs. the HCHI-CVT: The MT is rated at a combined EPA of 47 or 48. At least according to the EPA numbers, the MT does not offer an advantage. However, the database over at GH does suggest that the MT is good for an additional 2.5 mpg on average. These databases also show that the MT has more extremes (people with really high numbers). This suggests that the MT can be much better for those that know how to use it properly.

I do not know the real reason that Honda decided not to offer the MT in the HCHII, but popularity has to be a factor. I do not know the actual numbers, but the GH database has 6 times as many entries for the HCHI-CVT as the HCHI-MT. In trying to get the cost down of producing the hybrids, I would think it would be cheaper to design and manufacture one transmission option versus two.

xcel · #3 10-31-2006, 12:22 PM

Hi Chuck:

___Mr. Kite did his research

The 06 HCH-II is about a second quicker to 60 then the MT based HCH-I and a second and a half to two seconds quicker to the same vs. the HCH-I w/ a CVT.

___Now let us talk ratios …

HCH-I MT: Fifth: 5th: 0.711 * Final: 3.600 = 2.56
HCH-I CVT: Tallest: 0.407 * Final: 5.778 = 2.35
HCH-II CVT: Tallest: 0.421 * Final: 4.945 = 2.08

___I am speculating here but the reason the HCH-II w/out lean burn still maintains 51 on the highway is because of its ultra tall ratios as shown above.

___For a hypermiler, the stick will always lead to higher FE as it has manual control from an RPM for a given speed stand point and we need this. For the average driver, the CVT is smarter then they are so it provides all that is needed for said average driver to do very well indeed. The ability to FAS without having the belt still rolling around the sheaves is yet another reason the MT is more desirable for a hypermiler. That and the stick was $1,000 less expensive then the CVT in 05 as well

___Good Luck

___Wayne

Chuck · #4 10-31-2006, 01:03 PM

Mr Kite, Wayne, thank you for the info.

Yes, it sounded like higher performance was put into the HCH II.

Manual transmissions seem to be on the endargered list.

Guess on my part is cell phone use is a factor. There are less of them in larger cars. It took me a couple of weeks to get the hang of stick shifts, but I'm hooked.