I have decided to buy a HCH and am currently trying to decide on a tranny. I drove a new 2005 mt and it was fine; shifted smooth as butter but seemed anemic, although I can live with it (I also drive a vanagon!). Just for comparison, I tried a used 2003 CVT and was very impressed. It worked seamlessly and seemed to be much peppier than the mt.

Consumers Guide says they got 38 mpg with the cvt and 46 mpg with the manual. That's a significant difference to me, particularly as the mt is $1000 less.

Does this sound right to you? Does the mt generally get significantly more mpg than the cvt? I haven't been able to find any other data on this issue.

BTW, we have a 20 minute commute to work with few stops. Will use the car a bit around town, and it does get very hot in summer, but we are mainly looking for a vehicle for long trips. Also, which will do better on long grades in the mountains?

Bill,
While I've never driven a Civic Hybrid, if you'd look at this vehicle's page in the real hybrid mileage database, you'll notice that manual transmissions tend to be at the top and continuously variable transmission tend to be towards the bottom as far as the fuel economy spread goes. This could be due to the fact that the mileage-conscious buy manuals, but you may want to take a look, anyway.
http://www.greenhybrid.com/compare/mileage/civic/

Visit my newly-acquired website, Volconvo Debate Forums!

I have the CVT, and a couple of my colleagues have now bought HCH's also, and they got the MT.

They both like their MT very much. For me, I absolutely love the CVT. I can hardly tell the car is running, no matter what speed I am going. It is indeed seamless, and plus it make a small "brrrrrr" sound like a Jetson-mobile when I drive it. :-)

I traded in a 2002 Honda Civic Si (the hatchback) with a MT, and I like my CVT a lot better. But that's just my personal opinion.

I own a CVT and like it a lot. I do drive for mileage, though not ridiculously so, and see mid forties in mixed driving. With mostly highway driving you can push it beyond 50 without too many problems.

I really wonder what kind of a test Consumer Reports put that car through to wind up with only 36mpg.

However, I would advise waiting for the 2006 Civic Hybrid which will be redesigned and is supposed to have more power AND gets better mileage.

I own a 2003 HCH with the CVT. In my over 30-year driving career, I’ve always been a firm believer in manual transmissions, but once I began considering a hybrid, I decided to approach the CVT technology with an open mind. I must say that the Honda CVT has completely won me over. I’ve always driven small efficient cars, and most drivers of cars with small high-compression engines learn to keep the revs up in order to maximize power and performance. The engine used in the Honda Civic Hybrid, however, is designed for optimal low-end torque. The CVT works beautifully to balance load and demand, exploiting the low-end torque, and always finding the most efficient engine speed for a given situation. Often in city driving, the engine revs are lower than I would probably instinctively have them if I were driving with a manual, but there is never any hint of engine strain. Also, in driving some of my favorite routes to the coast (lots of hills and twisting turns) I’m amazed at how well the CVT does. I would have thought I’d be reaching for the shifter constantly, but it doesn’t even occur to me.

I would think the MT gets 1-2 additional MPG. I drove the CVT before buying my '04 MT, and think the MT has a bit MORE get up and go, but even that is a relative thing with these cars. Passing ability was one of my main concerns before buying, and I am happily surprised with the MT's passing ability. The CVT seems to take a bit more to "wind up".

It really depends on what you want. The mileage and power are very similar. I've driven both and prefer the MT mostly because you have more control. The Belt drive CVT also scares me on long term relability. It may last forever but I prefer the time tested, proven manual.

I think if you are not that serious about max MPG that the CVT is fine. It is not like the Insight where there is a huge difference in mileage between the MT and CVT versions.

The CVT advantage is that you don't need to shift and don't need to replace a clutch. CVT's also maximize regen when slowing down.

The MT has an advantage in coasting. If you feel it is safe you can turn the ICE completely off and coast. You can restart at any speed by turning the key or by picking the correct gear and pushstarting. My HCH with a MT is doing better than I ever epected in the MPG department. My last tank just put me at 59.1 lifetime. You will very likely not do as well. Working second shift, traveling on near empty roads give me a huge advantage.

On great thing about either version of the HCH is that the Civic is the most "honest" according to our database getting very close to the EPA numbers. All the other hybrids do much less than the EPA numbers.

edit, no change, just wanna see if the realtime mileage thingy pops up.

Thanks for all your comments and advice! I wanted a blue CVT and my wife a mag MT, and we ended up with the latter, which will be largely her car anyway. We drove both cars on the same 12 mile mixed city/expressway route and got 43 mpg with the CVT and 49 with the MT, which decided it for her. What decided it for me was that the MTs on the lot had Bridgestone tires and the CVTs Dunlops. The Bridgestones gave a significantly better, tighter, more responsive feel than the Dunlops, which felt sloppy in comparison, with a heavier feel to the wheel. I still think the CVT feels "peppier" than the MT, but that could be an entirely subjective impression having to do with the nature of the system.

Did you happen to check the tire pressure? Sounds kinda like the Dunlops were underinflated, or perhaps the Bridgestones overinflated, either of those.

No I certainly didn't check the pressures, although that could easily explain the difference. Guess we should carry gauges when we go car shopping! But I did drive both MTs with Bridgestones on the lot and two new and one used CVT with Dunlops and the results were consistent. My wife noticed the difference too, without knowing my impressions. There are three reviews of the Dunlops by HCH owners on TireRack.com - all negative - and one for the Bridgestones, noting a great improvement over the Dunlops. I also read the Green Seal report on LRR tires which put the Bridgestone #1.