Many of you suggested that I should try the CR-V Hybrid in my quest to replace the Subaru Forester of Persistent Regret, and who am I to judge the wisdom of the masses? If my biggest qualms with the Subaru are its constant small failings and crap gas mileage, certainly a Honda is the solution.
Being a car hack, I dialed up my local Honda press officer and requested a CR-V of the Hybrid variety. Press cars are typically sold when they hit 9,999 miles as that allows for a higher resale value and, in general, aren’t loaned out beyond 10,000 miles as that distance in the sweaty palms of car journalists is like 50,000 miles for a normal civilian vehicle.
The CR-V Hybrid in the New York fleet had 14,000 miles on it and was about to be sold but, if I could overlook the fact that the car had so many miles on it, Honda would let me borrow one for a week. Given I want to own one of these, the higher the mileage the better.
I haven’t been a fan of the last few generations of the CR-V and this blindspot made me pursue other options in my search for our next family car. Having spent a week with the new one, clearly this was a mistake.
Argument #1: Honda Fixes The Transmission Problem By Not Having A Transmission
The biggest qualm I have with the last two generations of Honda CR-V is that none of them came with an engine or, at least, it didn’t feel like they did when driving them. This lack of grunt was worsened by a CVT that’s just as bad as every other CVT, which is why I didn’t buy a CR-V back in 2016. The Forester also has a crappy CVT, but the car feels and sounds better than the CR-V that was on sale at the time.
How has Honda solved this problem with its new two-motor system? Simple. Honda calls the transmission an “eCVT” which is hilarious because the car’s transmission isn’t exactly continuously variable (it operates in certain fixed ratios) and also doesn’t exist. That’s right! They’ve solved the problem of modern transmissions by not having a transmission and making the vehicle essentially direct-drive.
Here’s a video sort of explaining how the original version of this system worked:
That screencap from the video is great and shows the two big electric motors. One of those motors is a motor/generator and exists to start the gasoline engine and then act as a generator the rest of the time. The other motor is used to power the wheels directly. For most of your low-speed cruising around town, the car is powered solely by an electric motor, with the engine turning on only to generate electricity as needed. This makes the car essentially a series hybrid.
However, when driving at higher speeds where a gas motor is highly efficient, the Atkinson-cycle 2.0-liter inline-four seamlessly switches on and the car becomes a parallel hybrid with the gas engine providing most of the forward power. At extremely high speeds, or in passing, the vehicle can use both the electric motor and gasoline engine for propulsion. Rather than route power via a transmission, the car is constantly and seamlessly swapping between different modes based on what would be most efficient. In fact, Honda says the two-motor hybrid system’s gas engine is one of the most thermally efficient gas motors ever produced.
The version I had, and would likely buy, is all-wheel drive. Unlike the Toyota Corolla Cross Hybrid I drove, the CR-V has a mechanical linkage to the rear wheels instead of a separate electric motor (also, Toyota uses a planetary gearset for what it calls an eCVT). In theory, this should make it a better performer in snowy/low traction conditions.
What’s it like in practice? When driving slowly and with enough battery power, the CR-V Hybrid glides along like an electric car, albeit for shorter periods than the Corolla Cross Hybrid. Fairly quickly, the gas motor will turn on to provide power when either needing extra torque or more juice for the lithium-ion battery pack stored under the rear cargo area.
At higher speeds (generally around 45 mph) a clutch will connect the gas motor to the wheels and propel the car forward, though it’s not easy to feel this as a driver. Because there’s no conventional transmission, the gas engine is never stressed and so doesn’t whine much. When driving at highway speeds the engine will turn off and the car will saunter along using electric power for short distances.
Again, none of this is particularly noticeable other than when the 2.0-liter gas motor kicks on or off, which is so effortless you won’t even notice it. For familiarity reasons, the CUV will mimic gearchanges as you quickly accelerate and, honestly, I don’t hate it.
The CR-V Hybrid isn’t fast, but it’s not slow, and it’s Santana featuring Rob Thomas smooth in the way it shuffles between various modes. My stupid CVT in my annoying Subaru is in a constant state of bugging the crap out of me, so my first big argument for the CR-V is that driving it is not a chore.
How this argument did (8/10)
Argument #2: It’s Way More Efficient Than Our Subaru
Driving a hybrid makes you pay way more attention to the fuel consumption of your non-hybrid cars. I currently own two of those, with my inline-six powered E39 BMW sharing duties with our Subaru. Based on the BMW’s internal measurements it’s probably averaging about 24 MPG and, in return, I get a rewarding driving experience. My Subaru just last week returned a miserable 12.8 MPG taking my daughter to her school, though overall it also averages 24 MPG, albeit never in a rewarding-to-drive sort of way.
Over the course of a week of attempting to ape the driving I’d normally do in the Subaru, I managed a fuel economy high of 51.1 MPG coming back from the gym, which is a mix of city and highway driving where this thing is super efficient. If you have a route where you’re just driving between 30-50 MPH, there’s scarcely anything with a gas engine I’ve seen that’s as miserly.
To be fair, I also did the home-to-school run, which includes a bunch of stop signs. It’s also mostly uphill and generally awful. Even then, I managed a reasonable 23.6 MPG and better than 40 MPG coming back home.
Overall, I ended up at 37.8 MPG in a week of mixed driving. The math on this works out in my favor. Assuming I continue to drive about 10,000 miles with the CR-V Hybrid I will use approximately 264 gallons a year, compared to 417 gallons annually for the Subaru. That’s a little more than 150 gallons of fuel a year, but we’ll round down just to be fair to Subie. At $4 a gallon for fuel that’s $600 a year. Gas might get a little cheaper or, as often happens, it might get a little more expensive.
My goal for the Subaru was to own it for 10 years, but its constant disappointments mean I’m going to abandon it in its eighth year. Assuming I can hold onto the CR-V hybrid for a full decade, I should save between $5,000-$6,000 over the life of the car (before considering all the random crap on the Subaru I’ve had to fix or replace).
In addition to the money I’ll save, I will also be doing more for the environment by burning less fuel. That’s nice, too.
How this argument did (9/10)
Argument #3: It’s Nice, But Not Conspicously So
One of my good friends just leased a new Kia Sportage PHEV, partially on my recommendation. It looks good, but it’s also a bit much. You notice it. The interior is attractive, yeah, but don’t she know it? It also has a lot of fidgety controls and the weird dual-mode touchscreen controls I don’t love.
By comparison, the CR-V Hybrid, even in the higher Sport Touring trim I had, looks and operates like a normal car. The two most distinguishing features are the screen that pops out of the dash (I don’t love it) and the thin honeycomb grille that covers the air-con vents (I do love it). There are physical dials and buttons for climate control, basic buttons for audio control, and a physical rocker switch to toggle between driving modes.
While I’m not a fan of the tacked-to-the-dash screen, this one at least has some buttons and allows you to use Apple CarPlay as the dominant operating system while driving. All of this works better than the Subaru though, to be fair, that’s because it’s a newer car. The Subaru also has a lot of buttons and dials and this has similar usability.
My daughter was extremely pleased to find a rear A/C vent, something lacking in the Subaru, as well as more than three extra inches of rear legroom.
My least favorite feature is the wireless charging pad, which takes up a lot of space and barely works. I’m also not a fan of the Sport Touring’s leather seats as they’re not particularly supple and a little firm for my taste. Just to be safe, my daughter and I went to the local Honda dealer to sit in a non-Touring hybrid with cloth seats and those were deemed to be more comfortable.
As the Sport, Sport Touring, and Sport L trims are all mechanically identical, I’m not convinced the extra money (a Sport Touring Hybrid is $40,800, compared to $34,350 for the base Sport Hybrid) is worth it. The base Sport is nicely spec’d.
On the outside, the RAV4 is a little busy and almost looks like it’s cosplaying as a tougher car, though it’s not unattractive. The new Escape looks like an old rental car. The Mazda CX-5 is probably the most attractive car in this segment. The CR-V looks almost like an old BMW in its restrained handsomeness. It’s the first CR-V since the original I would describe as handsome.
Black wheels are not my first choice, but black wheels are all you get when you get a hybrid. I’m also meh on the chrome-esque brightwork around the windows. Given enough time I’d make the window trim look black and the wheels look white. While stately in blue, I’m tired of having a car with a boring color.
How this argument did (9/10)
This Might Be The One
Conventional wisdom would dictate that a bunch of internet commenters are the last people you’d ask for car-buying advice, but in this particular instance, I’m glad I listened long enough to open my mind to the possibility of the CR-V Hybrid.
In an ideal world where I can just buy whatever I want, I’d probably go with the Ford Maverick Hybrid. It returns similar mileage to the CR-V Hybrid, is cheaper, and is a truck. The overall cost savings didn’t negate the fact that it’s a truck and my family cannot picture the bed as a giant trunk, even if I get a hard tonneau cover for it. The CR-V Hybrid is also much nicer than the Maverick on the inside.
The family was ok with the Corolla Cross Hybrid being a little smaller than most of the cars I looked at and, on digital paper, it should be cheaper than a comparable CR-V Hybrid. Unfortunately, getting a Corolla Cross Hybrid near MSRP isn’t easy, if you can get one at all. The CR-V Hybrid, by comparison, isn’t hard to find and is transacting at a reasonable price. Also, I know a guy.
While wireless CarPlay and the slightly larger interior screen would be nice, it’s not worth the premium. I think an AWD CR-V Hybrid in Radiant Red Metallic is the best of all worlds. Plus, it’s a Honda, so I’m hoping to spend very little money to keep it running over the years.
There’s one listed for $37,355 at Galpin Honda right now and it seems to check all the boxes.
I can’t believe you referenced The Streets lol
I can’t believe you referenced The Streets lol
I have a 4th gen (2013) CRV and it’s great, minus the cold start rattle which is either impending engine doom or merely a bothersome noise. Anyways, as far as utility vehicles go that can mostly do it all, only reason I’d stay away from the Maverick is because it’s made by Ford, and I’m not interested in paying the Toyota tax on a Rav-4 hybrid, which is also how I ended up in my current CRV.
Hard to beat a practical, all-around single vehicle with prices these days.
I have a 4th gen (2013) CRV and it’s great, minus the cold start rattle which is either impending engine doom or merely a bothersome noise. Anyways, as far as utility vehicles go that can mostly do it all, only reason I’d stay away from the Maverick is because it’s made by Ford, and I’m not interested in paying the Toyota tax on a Rav-4 hybrid, which is also how I ended up in my current CRV.
Hard to beat a practical, all-around single vehicle with prices these days.
I’m with you on the black wheels – they’ve been done to death. To me, they just look dirty all the time…….bring back shiny wheels that you can see!
I’m with you on the black wheels – they’ve been done to death. To me, they just look dirty all the time…….bring back shiny wheels that you can see!
Yeah you could do a lot worse than a CRV hybrid.
Matter of fact, you ARE doing a lot worse with your current vehicle… LOL
Yeah you could do a lot worse than a CRV hybrid.
Matter of fact, you ARE doing a lot worse with your current vehicle… LOL
“In fact, Honda says the two-motor hybrid system’s gas engine is one of the most thermally efficient gas motors ever produced.”
Oh?
“each engine paired with the two-motor hybrid system has been among the most thermally efficient gasoline engines ever used in a mass-production vehicle, with a thermal efficiency of around 40%, compared to the 25% to 30% thermal efficiency of most combustion engines.”
https://hondanews.com/en-US/honda-automobiles/releases/release-1503019bd8a757ea08267d7944378955-honda-two-motor-hybrid-electric-system
Which is the same as the hybrids from Toyota and the Skyactiv engines from Mazda and probably all the other modern hybrids. So yes it’s efficient compared to past cars but it’s mediocre to its competition.
“In fact, Honda says the two-motor hybrid system’s gas engine is one of the most thermally efficient gas motors ever produced.”
Oh?
“each engine paired with the two-motor hybrid system has been among the most thermally efficient gasoline engines ever used in a mass-production vehicle, with a thermal efficiency of around 40%, compared to the 25% to 30% thermal efficiency of most combustion engines.”
https://hondanews.com/en-US/honda-automobiles/releases/release-1503019bd8a757ea08267d7944378955-honda-two-motor-hybrid-electric-system
Which is the same as the hybrids from Toyota and the Skyactiv engines from Mazda and probably all the other modern hybrids. So yes it’s efficient compared to past cars but it’s mediocre to its competition.
I was recently at the Honda dealer for some warranty work on our Odyssey, and took advantage of the wait time to sit in the CR-V, Ridgeline, Pilot, and Accord. I had few complaints about any of them, and while I liked the Pilot the most, I was surprised at how far improved the new CR-V was over the last gen (which I have had as a rental a lot and had little to complain about). Now, after a decade of our Odyssey I’m used to some of the Honda quirks like hard plastics and odd placement of buttons or equipment, but at the same time I cannot fault anyone for picking up any of the models above.
Also, the leather seats in our Odyssey were pretty hard when they were new, but softened up considerably over the first 1000 miles or so.
I was recently at the Honda dealer for some warranty work on our Odyssey, and took advantage of the wait time to sit in the CR-V, Ridgeline, Pilot, and Accord. I had few complaints about any of them, and while I liked the Pilot the most, I was surprised at how far improved the new CR-V was over the last gen (which I have had as a rental a lot and had little to complain about). Now, after a decade of our Odyssey I’m used to some of the Honda quirks like hard plastics and odd placement of buttons or equipment, but at the same time I cannot fault anyone for picking up any of the models above.
Also, the leather seats in our Odyssey were pretty hard when they were new, but softened up considerably over the first 1000 miles or so.
This is a solid choice! The CR-V Sport L was my runner-up to my Maverick Lariat hybrid. After 18 months of waiting, I finally got the Maverick in January; I absolutely love it. I was equally impressed with the CR-V, and if there had been further 3-6 month delays on the Maverick I would have snagged the Honda and been perfectly happy.
Oddly enough, the Maverick replaced my ’13 Outback in daily driver duty. I love my 220k mile Outback, which has been relegated to vacation duty, but yes, it was needier than most my past cars in the maintenance department. And while it only saw snow once, it is/was an amazing little beast in our frequent torrential downpours. If Subaru had an Outback hybrid on the market I would have looked no further. I’m disappointed that for all their talk of nature and love (and dogs….), and in light of their deep relationship with Toyota, Subaru should have had hybrids across their line-up 5 years ago. And a small pickup.
This is a solid choice! The CR-V Sport L was my runner-up to my Maverick Lariat hybrid. After 18 months of waiting, I finally got the Maverick in January; I absolutely love it. I was equally impressed with the CR-V, and if there had been further 3-6 month delays on the Maverick I would have snagged the Honda and been perfectly happy.
Oddly enough, the Maverick replaced my ’13 Outback in daily driver duty. I love my 220k mile Outback, which has been relegated to vacation duty, but yes, it was needier than most my past cars in the maintenance department. And while it only saw snow once, it is/was an amazing little beast in our frequent torrential downpours. If Subaru had an Outback hybrid on the market I would have looked no further. I’m disappointed that for all their talk of nature and love (and dogs….), and in light of their deep relationship with Toyota, Subaru should have had hybrids across their line-up 5 years ago. And a small pickup.
My daughter-in-law and her mother both have brand new CR-Vs. Mom has the higher trim level naturally. I’ve ridden in, but not driven both of them. They are both world’s better than the Forester in every way.
However, I feel like you would be much happier in a CX-5. It has an actual transmission and is more fun than any other CUV.
I think that the only problem is, Mazda appears to have moved on form the CX-5 and goes to the CX-50, which looks wider, and s more expensive. We were looking for one for my son last Sept to lease.
Mazda is selling the CX-5 and CX-50 for the 2024 model year at least. One’s a little more city, the other a little more outdoorsy.
Correct, but very few were on the lots when we were looking. Still hard to find now.
My daughter-in-law and her mother both have brand new CR-Vs. Mom has the higher trim level naturally. I’ve ridden in, but not driven both of them. They are both world’s better than the Forester in every way.
However, I feel like you would be much happier in a CX-5. It has an actual transmission and is more fun than any other CUV.
I think that the only problem is, Mazda appears to have moved on form the CX-5 and goes to the CX-50, which looks wider, and s more expensive. We were looking for one for my son last Sept to lease.
Mazda is selling the CX-5 and CX-50 for the 2024 model year at least. One’s a little more city, the other a little more outdoorsy.
Correct, but very few were on the lots when we were looking. Still hard to find now.
Today is the first time I’ve given two minutes of thought to a CRV since the first one came out with the table-for-a-trunk-floor. The hybrid bit is pretty interesting. Good choice, if you’re not getting the Mazda.
Today is the first time I’ve given two minutes of thought to a CRV since the first one came out with the table-for-a-trunk-floor. The hybrid bit is pretty interesting. Good choice, if you’re not getting the Mazda.
Get the hybrid Maverick. I’ve found that just by putting an AMG emblem on the back, I get more power and the interior is better. Also, the family loves it now. In all seriousness, I love my Maverick, but maybe the CRV is better for your situation.
I want to love the Maverick, and I do in theory as it’s one of the only players in that segment; I’m just so hesitant to own another Ford product after so many past ones and their horrible long term quality. I plan to keep the vehicle for life so I wonder how reliable it will be in 8+ years.
Mine is a 2022 that took 16 months to get. I took delivery in October 2023 and I have just over 5000 miles on it. It has had at least 7 recalls so far, ranging from side airbag replacement to emissions, to risk of the engine going kablamo and starting a fire. Most of these were fixed via software updates. The airbags were replaced. If this is any indication of long-term quality, I’m not optimistic. Maybe the newer ones are better?
Sounds about right on brand from my previous Ford ownership.
Get the hybrid Maverick. I’ve found that just by putting an AMG emblem on the back, I get more power and the interior is better. Also, the family loves it now. In all seriousness, I love my Maverick, but maybe the CRV is better for your situation.
I want to love the Maverick, and I do in theory as it’s one of the only players in that segment; I’m just so hesitant to own another Ford product after so many past ones and their horrible long term quality. I plan to keep the vehicle for life so I wonder how reliable it will be in 8+ years.
Mine is a 2022 that took 16 months to get. I took delivery in October 2023 and I have just over 5000 miles on it. It has had at least 7 recalls so far, ranging from side airbag replacement to emissions, to risk of the engine going kablamo and starting a fire. Most of these were fixed via software updates. The airbags were replaced. If this is any indication of long-term quality, I’m not optimistic. Maybe the newer ones are better?
Sounds about right on brand from my previous Ford ownership.
Although you seem to have your mind made up, you may want to check out Consumer Report’s take on PHEVs. Some of the paybacks are insane and if saving the planet is a priority a pure EV would be the better choice if you can charge at home. https://www.consumerreports.org/cars/plug-in-hybrids/will-a-plug-in-hybrid-save-you-money-a9313086164/
Agreed. But sometimes it’s a balance of multiple things. Sometimes it’s that people want to charge at home to reduce gas station visits, but they also want to be able to road trip just like they used to.
My wife would love a PHEV simply so she’d rarely have to pump gas in 15F weather, but she also has zero interest in figuring out charging (not that it’s all that hard) if she’s traveling far without me. PHEV means she can basically treat her car like she always has, just needs to plug it in at home. And I’d take care of installing the charger, so it’s easy.
Second this, not having to go to a gas station is an unexpected, but huge, bonus of an EV/PHEV
I don’t think he has a place to plug in at home. PHEVs are a harder sell in that situation.
Although you seem to have your mind made up, you may want to check out Consumer Report’s take on PHEVs. Some of the paybacks are insane and if saving the planet is a priority a pure EV would be the better choice if you can charge at home. https://www.consumerreports.org/cars/plug-in-hybrids/will-a-plug-in-hybrid-save-you-money-a9313086164/
Agreed. But sometimes it’s a balance of multiple things. Sometimes it’s that people want to charge at home to reduce gas station visits, but they also want to be able to road trip just like they used to.
My wife would love a PHEV simply so she’d rarely have to pump gas in 15F weather, but she also has zero interest in figuring out charging (not that it’s all that hard) if she’s traveling far without me. PHEV means she can basically treat her car like she always has, just needs to plug it in at home. And I’d take care of installing the charger, so it’s easy.
Second this, not having to go to a gas station is an unexpected, but huge, bonus of an EV/PHEV
I don’t think he has a place to plug in at home. PHEVs are a harder sell in that situation.
I have no frame of reference for the 2024 CR-V but our now 24 year old CR-V with 200,000 miles on it is the best automotive decision we’ve ever made.
I have no frame of reference for the 2024 CR-V but our now 24 year old CR-V with 200,000 miles on it is the best automotive decision we’ve ever made.
I have a 2024 CRV Hybrid. Not sure what your issue is with the charging pad, it works perfectly fine for me.