Sporty CR-Z hybrid built with spirit of CRX

Photos don't do the 2011 Honda CR-Z justice - in person, the little gasoline-electric hybrid has more attitude than you'd expect, and surprisingly sporty performance to back it up.

But if you're looking for Toyota Prius-type hybrid mileage, you'll be disappointed: The CR-Z we tested is EPA-rated at 31 miles per gallon in the city, 37 on the highway, compared to the Prius' 51 mpg city, 48 highway. In a long day of driving the CR-Z almost 600 miles, mostly on the highway, we averaged 35.8 mpg. Not bad, but only a little better than you'd expect from the non-hybrid Honda Fit.

In fact, the original two-passenger Honda Insight hybrid - the 2001 model, for instance, not the current four-door Insight - was rated at 48 mpg in the city, 60 mpg highway, using the current EPA ratings for an apples-to-apples comparison.

So why does this new two-seat Honda hybrid get worse mileage than the old two-seat Honda hybrid?

There is no one big answer; just a lot of little ones that add up: The new car has loads more equipment - traction control, stability control, side and side-curtain airbags, a 360-watt sound system - and that helps bump the weight of the CR-Z we tested to over 2,700 pounds.

Plus, I remember that original Honda Insight, and the only fun you had was computing your exceptional mileage. The 2011 CR-Z has 122 horsepower - 13 of that from the electric motor that helps out the gasoline engine - and yes, it is satisfying to drive. Plus, unlike the original Insight, it has really, really good air conditioning.

Also, keep in mind that the CR-Z is a partial hybrid, meaning that it can't move on electrical power alone, the way full hybrids like the Prius can. The electric motor helps out the gas engine and, though the gas engine turns off at a stop light, the car won't move until you let out the clutch and the engine restarts. It's cheaper and simpler for Honda to build partial hybrids, but it does trim mileage compared to full hybrids.

The CR-Z is manufactured in the spirit of the long-gone Honda CRX two-seater, still a very popular car with young enthusiasts. Like the CRX, the CR-Z has two seats and plenty of storage space under the big two-piece rear window. Those front seats, though, could use more padding - Honda engineers were likely trying to save weight, but that's the wrong place to do it.

The CR-Z starts at just under $20,000, and tops out at about $24,000 for the EX model with the navigation system and the CRT (continuously variable transmission, which works like an automatic). Our tester EX had the manual transmission, which costs $650 less, but actually averages three fewer miles per gallon than the CRT. The slick six-speed manual would still be my choice.

With a wheelbase of just 95.9 inches, the CR-Z is nimble, but the ride is pretty choppy, especially on moderately rough pavement. Handling and braking are very good, up to the old CRX standards.

The CR-Z has three power settings: Sport, Normal and Economy. On Sport, the electric motor helps out more, noticeably adding to acceleration. On Economy, acceleration is more gradual, but mileage is better. Normal, as you would expect, is a compromise. I ended up using Sport to merge onto the freeway, then I'd hit the Economy button. Just cruising along, you can't tell the difference.

For the first hundred miles or so, I was a little lukewarm toward the CR-Z, but it began to win me over with its handling, thoughtfully designed cockpit and general good looks. I'd like it better if it could get, say, 40 mpg, and it probably could if Honda dialed back the fun factor. But that's a tradeoff I'd decline - at least until gas hits $4 a gallon again.

Steven Cole Smith is the automotive editor of the Orlando Sentinel.