I have had the opportunity to drive both vehicles. Drove a 2008 Civic Hybrid tonight. I have driven a couple Pruises in the past.

The Civic is noticeably more smoother in my opinion. It also appears to have a larger cabin area. There is a surprising large amount of room in these particular vehicles. However, although the Toyota hybrid system is not nearly as smooth, I do feel it is a better hybrid system. At least it seems more effective and the fuel economy number reflect that, although the Civic is bigger.

I believe the Civic only has a 20hp electrical motor whereas the Pruis is closer to 70hp. The Civic gas engine is more powerful though.

In driving the Civic, it only shuts down at stop lights. The Pruis will shut down at slower speeds. The motor boost often reaches max on the Civic but also reaches recharge capacity at very low braking amounts. This means a lot of energy is wasted to heat via the real brakes. However, the CVT is VERY VERY smooth on the Honda. It is by far the most smooth CVT i've driven.

The Civic I drove has 830 miles on the odometer. It's average was only 35.8mpg. However, I will say the drivers aren't engineering type....she drives like a jackrabbit. After break-in, it might get to 40mpg average.

The Toyota is not nearly as smooth and does not have handling/comfort feeling the Civic does. However, it does appear to do better on fuel and is about $1k cheaper.

I know a lot of BABC'ers do not like hybrids. Let's not make this that type of discussion. Instead, lets compare the technologies.

YOUR INPUT?

Winner based on technology - Prius.

This sentence rats out the Civic -


There is no efficiency to having the electric motor - in fact - it's a gas waster. It is only there so they can put a smaller gas engine in the vehicle and still get acceptable performance.

My wife's Camry Hybrid got 36 right out of the box and regularly does 38-39 now. I'd say 35.8 on the Civic is horrible.


Now, if you're buying for looks - the Civic beats the ugly Prius hands down.

Indy, what engine does mama have in her Camry?

D-rod, is the civic's system the same as the Accord?

My father has the Accord hybrid and really likes it. However, is does mildly complain about the mileage.

Indy: I don't disagree that the Toyota system is "better". It uses battery power more often then the Honda system did. But, the Pruises I have driven are no where near as smooth as the Civic was. The Civic has great steering command (doesn't feel electrically dead like the Pruis does) and fantastic break feel (Pruis feels spongy, touchy, and odd).

2Suns: They are different systems. Your father has a bigger engine, bigger electrical system.

BTW: Honda markets the hybrid as an "assist" system. That's truly how it operates. It does not drive around parking lots on electrical power.

Indy: I would be interested in hearing how the Hybrid Camry drives. Have you driven a Pruis to compare to?

If 40 mpg is all it gets then I will keep my corolla. I have a stripped 2006 Toyota Corrolla CE that consistently gets 38 driving 70 mph. If I drive 60 I get 41-42. I only paid 14k for it.

I understand all the environmental issues and agree with most of them, but until hybrids get a whole lot cheaper or a whole lot better mileage (esp on the hwy) I will stick with tried and true technology.

To be fair, a lot of these miles were in the hilly city of Lawrence. To compare, my Camry gets 18/19mpg around here.

Hybrids by design can't help on the highway a whole lot. However, they do well in town.

Looking under the hood is an interesting sight. It's a COMPACT DESIGN to say the very least. I did notice the engine spec'd 0w-20 oil. That's good to see.

Also, Honda makes it clear their Hybrid system is simply an assist system. It's marketed as Intelligent Motor Assist (ISM) or something like that under the hood. Wish I had my camera. But, it was an engineering marvel sight.

I haven't looked under a Toyota hood.

First time I have heard Kansas described as "hilly".

I think the only purpose the electric motors serve on the hybrids is to recover energy from the braking system that would normally just be wasted. Unfortunately most of us do not have the extreme "city only" driving to make it pay. 40 MPG is 40 MPG so why spend the extra $$$ for a car with two propulsion systems?

It will be interesting to see some real world numbers on longevity and maintenance costs for these cars.

How much weight do these systems add to a vehicle? Seems that would have to be a factor in the net efficiency that could be achieved.

The value that the hybrids have is a subject that has been debated a lot. We should concentrate on the comparison of the two concepts as requested. For the right people, it is a valid concept. It is just that too many people do not grasp that.

Kansas is hilly. Even as boring as western Kansas is, it is still hilly. It is just seems flat due to how far you can see. Eastern Kansas is very interesting terrain. As a kid, I used to climb the hills outside my house and walk along the granite ledge formations. It was like a sidewalk over a hundred feet above the valley and you could walk along it for miles.

Don't know what engine the Camry Hybrid has - I think it's a 2.0 4 cylinder. What I do know is that it is a very efficient engine. The first thing you notice about it is the exhaust pipe is about 3 inches in diameter - compared to about an inch and a half on a normal Camry. I think the Camry Hybrid weighs about 200 lbs more than the standard - but it is loaded with options.

I've driven both the Prius and the Camry Hybrid. The powertrain of the two doesn't "feel" a whole lot different.

The Hybrid drive is pretty well transparent, once you get used to the engine starting up and stopping - which adds some odd vibrations to the experience. Personally, I don't care for the CVT transmission - but I think that's just because I'm used to feeling gear changes. The brakes on the Hybrids are a little abrupt compared to a normal vehicle - they use both the brakes and the generator to slow the vehicle.

The differences between the Camry and the Prius come down to the following - Comfort, Size, Controls, and Mileage. The Camry is larger rides and handles better and has more conventional controls - it also has more luxury equipment and costs a bit mroe. The Prius is smaller, noisier (small higher pressure tires), has bad driver vision in spots (really weird sight lines), rides rougher, is noisier and has really funky controls - for example the shifter is a little joystick thing. But the Prius does get better mileage than the Camry.

A note on gas mileage - the real advantage the Toyota Hybrids have is in City mileage - My wifes car gets 38-39 mpg in city driving. It gets about 40 on the highway. In the city is where the electric motor drive, the regenerative braking and the smaller gas engine really shine.

No doubt the Honda Hybrid is smoother - that's because it uses the electric motor only in conjuction with the gas engine - so the gas engine isn't shutting off and turning on while driving.

Personally I think the best Hybrid design for our nation was the First GM truck Hybrid that nobody bought. It didn't have an electric motor or a battery - which made the cost of the system low. It did have stoplight shutoff and regen brakes. But everybody laughed because it only got 10-15% more economy - (however city economy was better than that and most construction/utility trucks are driven locally) - and think about it, "only 10-15% better economy" on the most common vehicle in the Unites States would have been fantastic.

The Camry Hybrid uses the same 158/160hp 2.4L engine the other Camry's use, infact it's basically the same engine in my dad's 05 Camry. And, not to argue with you because you DO work in the automotive field, it's NOT exactly a super efficient engine. It uses pretty heavy pistons and doesn't have the efficiency control software/hardware that the newer Toyota engines do. It's not nearly as "efficient" as the 3.5L V6 or 5.7L V8 is. With that said, in the grand scheme of things, it IS a relatively efficient engines compared to many engines offered with comparable power from other manufactures....and it's a 6.5 year old design (debuted in 02). The 2.4L's are sensitive to the oil ran in them. Run Mobile 1 5-30 and you will reduce some of the interal friction and increase the overall mileage (we picked up 1.5mpg switching our 2005 over).

Second thing is your numbers are far, far, far above EPA estimates. That can be a good thing. EPA suggest 33/34 city/highway. Have you checked the computer fuel mileage with the old fashion hand calculation?

Many 2.4L Toyota engines have inaccurate computer fuel milage readings. It's a problem we have with our 2005 and that my grandma had with her late model Camry. Our's will ready about 38/39mpg on the highway when it's really only getting about 32/33. It's about 6mpg off on the highway, about 4mpg off in city driving.

I'm not necessarily implying that your car is not getting the mileage posted. It is entirely possible. However, I did want to note the Toyota fuel mileage issue which is a major PITA and a huge disappointment. We're still working to resolve our issue but no one really seems to know HOW to fix it.

Secondly, the touchy brakes thing you mentioned is what drives me friggen nuts with the Toyota Synergy system. It's a bit obnoxious. The Honda system does use regen breaking. It's VERY smooth and LINEAR compared to the Toyota system. The Honda also shuts down after you get below 10mph and are coming to a stop. It says off until you push on the gas to take off.

Just more ramblings.

Yup, checked the numbers - it's pretty accurate

I know it's not exactly the same engine as the standard Camry - because the airflow through it has to be different with that giant exhaust pipe (looks like something out of a Cat Diesel)

As I said, Honda probably is smoother - but Toyota way outsells them.

This thread raised my curiosity. Turns out...

The Hybrid Camry uses a Atkinson combustion cycle 2.4L 147hp engine instead of the Otto cycle 160hp the non-hybrid gets.

Makes a lot of sense now. God, I want one.