(upbeat music)
- Compact SUV's are almost as popular
as hand sanitizer these days.
And each month, the Honda CR-V and Toyota RAV4
battle for the slot of compact SUV favorite.
With hybrids in each model's lineup,
there's even more to choose from.
I'm Jennifer Geiger
- And I'm Brian Normile.
We tested top trims of these two SUV's,
the Honda CR-V hybrid Touring
and the Toyota RAV4 hybrid limited
in a variety of categories.
We measured fuel economy, cargo space,
interior quality and driving impressions as well.
It was a close contest
but in the end we were able to determine a winner.
- There's a lot to like about these hybrid compact SUV's
but ultimately the RAV4 came out ahead.
Here are several ways where it bested the Honda CR-V
and a few areas where it lagged behind.
(upbeat music)
Where the RAV4 really stood out was going and stopping.
Both of the models are really well-matched
in terms of horsepower but the Rav4 felt so much quicker
off the line with a much more linear power delivery
and overall just felt a lot faster than the CR-V.
- Absolutely. I mean, the CR-V didn't necessarily
feel slow as much as the RAV4 felt quick
but the CR-V definitely takes longer to build up power
and it just feels slower off the line.
- Yes, totally. Breaking is another area
where the RAV4 really stood out.
Hybrid brakes often have that
kind of firm brick-like feeling
and Toyota did a really good job
disguising that in this car,
it still doesn't feel as natural as normal brakes,
non-hybrid brakes, but it felt more natural
than the CR-Vs mushy pedal.
- Yeah, I was a little bit harsher than you,
I think, on the brakes here.
Definitely mushy feel in the CR-V,
little bit more natural in the RAV4
but still just not really a pleasant feeling
compared to non-hybrid cars.
So not my favorite part of these.
- [Jennifer] One of the main reasons people buy hybrids
is obviously fuel economy.
And here again, the RAV4 scored much, much better
than the CR-V during our mileage drive.
- [Brian] Yeah, definitely over our about 165 miles
of mixed city and highway driving,
both of them turned in ratings over 40 miles per gallon
but the RAV4 definitely came out ahead,
which matched its EPA ratings.
- One thing hybrid shoppers should be aware of
is both of these models are loud but in different ways.
The RAV4 was really loud
on just regular acceleration from a stop,
the CR-V, it started getting really loud on highway passing.
- And another area the RAV4 stood out
was with its driving modes.
Sport actually felt sporty and eco felt like
it was actually prioritizing fuel efficiency.
And the CR-V, it didn't really change anything.
- Yeah, I mean, people are buying these to save fuel
but unfortunately using the eco mode
often feels like a drag.
Handling is probably not the main reason
people are buying one of these cars
but this another area where the RAV4 really stood out.
It stayed more composed in corners.
It had firmer more direct steering
and it really just felt overall
more maneuverable than the CR-V.
- Absolutely, it definitely seemed like the CR-V
prioritizes comfort more than sportiness.
So it does have numb handling compared to the RAV4
but it also has better composure over bumps
and imperfections and a more comfortable ride.
- Yeah, in terms of comfort,
the RAV-4 definitely does not prioritize ride comfort.
It was firmer over bumps.
There's a lot more impact harshness.
And just overall the ride is just
a lot more uncomfortable than the CR-V's.
Inside, another area where the RAV4 really stood out
was with its controls.
This screen sits really nice and high on the dash.
It's kind of dated and clunky looking
but it works a lot better than the CR-V's.
It's got straight forward menus.
It's really responsive to the touch
and it just has more physical buttons
making it easier to use.
I love the significant power and volume knob
and the tune and scroll knob.
- Yeah and in the CR-V, it's pretty much the opposite.
So the presentation of the instrument panel
and the multimedia screen looks great.
Doesn't function so well. The menus are confusing.
The screen here is slow to respond to things
and to top it all off,
you get this push button gear selector
which can be kinda confusing.
Whereas the RAV4 still has the straightforward lever method.
- That gear selector took me a while to get used to.
- Yeah and another thing that took me a while
to get used to actually
is the fact that this multimedia system
only has a volume knob, no tuning knob
and the volume knob is so close
to some of the climate controls
that I often found myself adjusting climate
when I meant to turn up or down the radio
- It overall felt really clumsy to me too.
- [Brian] One of the categories the CR-V
actually stood out in was interior quality.
It's got some real leather,
it's got convincing fake wood trim
but it visually looks nice
and it's just overall a very comfortable place to be.
It's got a little bit more rear leg room.
And I found upfront, I had a little bit more leg room
compared to the RAV4,
where the center console would actually
sort of bang into my knee.
And it just wasn't that comfortable.
- Yeah, I definitely agree.
I think the CR-V's cabin is a lot classier looking,
in terms of the materials,
and the RAV4's cabin is fine, it's average.
It's just nothing really stands out as extra.
And also that weird leg room situation, it's significant
and it definitely felt more comfortable
in the backseat in the CR-V.
- Yeah and based on our measurements,
it actually costs you a tiny bit in cargo space
but nothing really noticeable.
I mean, I didn't open up the back of the CR-V
and go, "Oh no, that's a tiny cargo area."
It's just a tiny little bit less
than what we measured in the RAV4.
In cabin storage, the CR-V also came out a little bit ahead.
It's got this nifty little configurable center console
with some deep storage and some sliding spaces.
It's also open at the front,
which concerns me a little about putting stuff in
and then having it fly forward if you come to an abrupt stop
but it's just a little bit more utilitarian
than what you find in the RAV4.
- Yeah, I really liked that space.
I liked that it was big.
I liked that it was configurable with the sliding panels.
I could put a small purse in there, which was nice.
The RAV4's is fine.
It's deep, but it's just, again, it's just average.
It's not really remarkable.
- Yeah, that seems to be the story of the RAV4's interior.
The CR-V also came out ahead in value.
It's about $38,000,
whereas the RAV4 came in at over $42,000.
And the CR-V also has a few standard features
that were optional on the RAV4,
like a hands-free power lift gate and a moon roof.
- The RAV4 price quickly escalated
once you added extras.
In safety though, it did have more features than the CR-V,
like the 360-degree camera, which was optional,
and the rear braking,
which was part of its standard safety package.
- And part of the RAV4's a higher price
was due to a lot of dealer add-ons.
It had about $1,500 worth,
including things like the roof rails, the cargo mats,
the floor mats, some of the blacked-out badging
but even without that factored in
it was still more expensive than the CR-V,
which is sort of a mono-spec trim.
- True, so in the end, the RAV4 won the challenge
but it was actually pretty close in a lot of categories.
But what hybrid shoppers should know
is that in all of the categories that they care about,
like acceleration, braking and fuel economy,
the RAV4 won pretty handily.
- Yeah, the CR-V held its own
but it won in categories like value
and interior and things like that.
So it's not a bad choice.
We just think the RAV4 is better.
- Yeah, for the full story
and all the rankings on these two cars
head over to cars.com.
(upbeat music)