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.
How the hell does a Forester even get that low mileage? I think an old friend’s ’68 big block Chevelle could hit 10. Either way, I’m glad I’m not having to shop in this category.
Probably idling in the school pickup line for 90% of it. Quite an outlier that was a weird highlight in this article.
I was initially wondering if it’s running really rich, but he said he generally averages 24, which seems about normal, if still pretty bad by my standards.
I would have suggested waiting for a Civic Hybrid hatchback, which would probably do just about everything you need for several thousand less. Of course, I would have told you to spend a little extra for the CX-5 instead of the Forester, so you wouldn’t have been compelled to get anything for another few years. Unfortunately, I can’t help always being right about everything ever, though. It’s a curse.
If the Civic was more wagon-esque I’d agree.
If the Civic managed 55mpg combined I’d agree.
The sloped back mean a lot less junk in the trunk for vacations than the Civic though… and the fuel has a diminishing rate of return going from 40mpg to 50mpg. CRV is probably it.
My vote is anything except a Subaru. Their reputation has far exceeded reality for 20+ years, from blown head gaskets from the mid to late 2000s and early 2010s to the horrific CVTs to parts that just…break, as you have indicated on so many occasions. Fuji Heavy Industries has been living on rep and safety for a generation. Even Toyota can’t polish these turds.
It’s a shame…my favorite car of all time on Gran Turismo (1 and 2, yes I’m old) was the Suby Legacy…tuned to 550+ HP. I dreamed of having that sleeper one day.
i think it was Toyota that did them in. I had 3 Subarus before 2005 when GM sold their stake in Subaru to Toyota.
I had a 2005 legacy 2.5i sedan, not even the GT. That car went from 9k miles to 190k without any issue, save rear brakes that had to be done every year or so. Also, headlights tuned yellow, but that was a for all cars of that age. Now, my parents got a 2007 Ouchback, same generation as my legacy (BL/BP). That thing needed to have the dashboard replaced because it turned sticky, head gaskets, the exhaust headers along with the cat. you could see the cost cutting between the legacy and the outback. Now, i have a 2017 WRX and after 120k miles the car has been pretty trouble free, save for the door frames rusting, like it wants to return to framless windows
That is a possibility. You’re not wrong…it was about then when everything went wrong for them.
I have gasoline ‘24 CR-V, and apart from the fact that it isn’t a manual like our ‘06 (160k and still going strong) we like it very much. Minor gripes: CarPlay should be wireless. I should be able to permanently shut off lane-shift and brake proximity nannying. Other than that it’s a solid unit.
Great choice for considering the CR-V…they are good cars (my wife has one) I’m not into SUV’s (I have an Accord) but love Honda for a daily driver car, I think they are the most reliable car there is…way better than that Subie…you will be happy
You’re a youngster, so perhaps you don’t know that Ford has been making the same kind of E-CVT drivetrain for 15 years or more. So has Toyota. It’s en eminently logical way to make a smooth, durable drivetrain. So go ahead and buy that Honda- it really is a no-brainer.
In the category of terrible marketing decisions, Honda and Toyota both naming their hybrid transmissions “eCVT”, even though they are not CVTs (and also not the same as each other!) is a real contender for a podium position. Why would you intentionally brand your product as something that is at worst fiercely loathed, and at best grudgingly tolerated? It’s like confessing for a crime you didn’t commit. And it’s a lie that adds confusion to the market.
This is like if Hawaiian Punch came out with new packaging that said “Now featuring sulfuric acid!”, but it’s the exact same non-acidic drink as before. Why do that to your product?
Non-car trivia: When I got out of grad school, my first job was with Brand Marketing for Hawaiian Punch. They were launching a new red grape flavor and needed a product name. They were considering something like Red Grape Punch. I suggested “Grapeful Red.” The powers that be were in the pocket of Big Sugar Water and didn’t go for it. Their loss.
Chiat/Day would’ve done it.
Seriously though, this is the greatest marketing story I have ever heard from the source!
Well, Toyota did start using the name eCVT before CVT had become mainstream and it is a CVT since it can create continuously variable gear ratio between the engine and the wheels.
This Honda on the other hand has a 2 speed transmission which it enages when it feels like it and the rest of the time it operates as a series hybrid. So definitely not a CVT even if it seems like it is some of the time.
Are the hybrids actually more sporty than the normal ICE model?
Not sure about sporty (I think they just add the large wheel package) – but it is certainly a more pleasant and speedy driving experience, especially in sport mode.
Nearly every review I’ve read says the hybrid is the one to get; the added power and efficiency is a win-win.
Out of curiosity, did you, just for family fun, make any arguments for replacing the Subaru with say a Dodge Charger Hellcat Redeye Angry Antisocial Special Screw You edition or similar?
Came here to say this exactly, then thought better of it. Glory to your house!
Dude. A DCHR AASSY version would have sold so well. Do you work in marketing
So um, do Autopian employees get the employee discount at Galpin? 😛
More importantly, what about autopian members?
Aside from the perplexing combination of aluminum window trim with black wheels, it’s the perfect car for normies. I think it’s quite handsome except for the black wheels and I love Hondas new interior designs.
The new CRV and especially HRV are seriously handsome vehicles, especially in person. The HRV turns my head every time I see one. It has been a delight to see Honda’s designers wake up from whatever slumber they were in for so long.
Is this the same hrv that looks like Honda quickly cribbed the design of the Ford Escape but made it look like it’s sucking on a lemon to make if different?
I’m gonna say this…the HR-V looks Audi-esque.
It sounds like you’re finally getting somewhere warmer playing your 20 questions game of “what car should we buy” with your family… Based on your guesses and their answers, I think the car they’re really looking for is:
…
Drum roll please
…
A Dodge Journey!
(or if there aren’t any available around you, a used beige Aztek)
Once Honda changed to the eCVT transmission, I’ve been recommending them to everyone who asks. They’re the only thing as good as a Toyota, and they might even be better.
Just a couple of dislikes:
I don’t like fake shift points in my eCVT, so I’m very glad my Clarity doesn’t have that sort of nonsense.
Compared to Toyota, I also don’t like that there’s a clutch in there that might wear out eventually. So far, I haven’t heard of one being replaced, and other automatics remain reliable even though they also contain clutch packs, so I’m unconcerned.
Overall, I’m very impressed. I do want Honda to scale the system up to the Odyssey, Pilot and Ridgeline, that way I’ll have more choices available when I retire my Town & Country.
If you think Honda is as good or better than Toyota, you need a bigger sample size.
I’d put Mazda ahead of both of them for reliability, dependability, and even safety-wise (unless you’re the type of driver who depends on the “assist” functions, in which case you should buy a Volvo or get a chauffeur). However there are a lot more Toyota and Honda dealerships, which can make servicing and repairs easier during the warranty period.
I would rate Mazda a close third, now that they’ve addressed their almost criminal lack of rustproofing and addressed the early Skyactiv motor problems. Early Skyactiv motors weren’t nearly as good as expected.
On the other hand, unlike almost everyone else, Mazda was smart enough to stick to conventional automatics and completely avoid friction-drive CVTs.
I wouldn’t hesitate to buy or recommend a Mazda, but I’d still suggest a Honda or Toyota hybrid model first.
Matt have Galpin draw up the paperwork there’s no reason to wait any longer
I look forward to your “I finally got off my tuckus and pulled the trigger on a CR-V hybrid” article, hopefully later this week but possibly next month.
My dad, who has always driven BASE models and clunkers for most of my childhood (salvage title Cressida, Toyota Echo with 0 options, LX 2012 Civic) just bought a mid-trim CRV Hybrid. This is THE most loaded car he’s ever had, and for the money, it’s super nice. He loves it and is oddly protective of it. I am super proud that he’s worked so hard for something this nice. Averages 40 mpg. Fits 5 in relative comfort. Using the paddle shifters for regenerative braking is kind of fun. I recommend these for folks who want a crossover.
Believe it or not, there are countless millionaires who LOVE their CRV’s.
I was so happy when I saw the hyperlink in The Streets reference to know I wasn’t just making up the connection.
The only downside, is that the CRV hybrid ( 2021[mine], dunno about ’24) is not rated for towing. They have a tow hitch available, but will only sell it to you for bike racks and similar. Something about how the hitch is right on the other side of the sheet metal from the traction battery.
For the ’21, the owner’s manual specifically says that towing voids all vehicle warranties.
If you plan to tow with your CRV, you need the ICE only version.
That changed with the 2023 refresh. You can now tow a little bit (1,000lbs). I guess thats enough for a small landscape trailer.
Since 2023 they modified the hybrid system to have an additional low speed lockup clutch on the CR-V only which gives it the ability to tow 1,000lbs. Not much but better than before.
I TOLD YOU MATT! The current CRV is like the Ferrari of NPC cars. It’s attractive. It’s very refined for what it is. The interior is quite nice and the materials are a cut above a lot of the competition. It also has a metric fuck ton of usable space…and if you go easy on the options it’s downright affordable in today’s market. I’d say it’s well put together as well. No rattles, loose bits, fitment issues, etc.
It’s the perfect appliance, particularly when equipped with the hybrid powertrain. It’s a car that’ll take you and your family/stuff everywhere you need to go in relative comfort and sip fuel/emit more sparingly along the way. It’ll also last 10+ years with nothing but routine maintenance. It’s my go to recommendation when non car people ask me what they should get for their basic transportation.
CRV hybrid isn’t always the answer, but it’s frequently the answer. And I agree with your assessment of the Sportage/want to generalize it to all the Hyundai/Kia crossovers. They are too fucking busy when it comes to the styling. I appreciate that Hyundai and Kia are willing to take risks and are trying to inject some spice into a soulless class of vehicles…but in my appliance I don’t want here and now styling that’s at high risk of aging poorly.
Give me the understated but handsome blandness every time. Also my wife’s CRV is a 2015 and it’s had absolutely no issues whatsoever.
“The ferrari of NPC cars” hahahahahahahah
The car’s nice and all, but the review gets +100 for the Streets reference.
Have you considered, um, “accidentally” crashing the Subaru, taking the insurance payoff, and buying a couple of shitboxes?
I’ve heard David Tracy will have a few on the block in the near future. The money you save can buy a LOT of gas, and y’know, just don’t crash.
“My Subaru just last week returned a miserable 12.8 MPG taking my daughter to her school” Holy hell! That’s as bad as my Sierra crew cab does around town in the winter!
yes, you will get that waiting in line forever for drop off, and for short trips with lots of waiting for lights to turn green. I don’t know Matts specific driving habits, but i assume the dismal mileage is because of the waiting with the engine running.
I’m a teacher, I know what a drop off line looks like. Also, our family’s AWD CX-5 primarily pulls this same duty, and returns 19-20 mpg.
Come on man, go turn some wrenches or something. I’ve owned cars for less time than you’ve spent writing these articles.
I was sure he was going to purchase a Honda before the end of the article. Alas, we’ll have to tune in again next time…
It’s like “Dallas.” Next month we’ll find out all these musings were just a dream.
The best part about that reference is that even if you’re not old enough to actually be familiar with it, you still get it. Well played.
Generally cant go wrong with a Honda. Usually what I gravitate towards whenever I’m tired of dealing with car issues.