It’s been a little more than two years since I chucked my 2016 Subaru Forester, which I didn’t love, for a 2024 Honda CR-V Hybrid AWD my family has nicknamed ‘Big Red.’ I’ve driven it almost 18,000 miles in that time, and have used a little under 500 gallons of fuel. While my decision wasn’t primarily motivated by saving fuel, I am curious how I’ve done so far.
If you missed the whole saga of my Forester, most of my issues revolved around small maintenance issues and overall disappointing quality. The CVT was underwhelming in the way most CVTs from that era are, and the fuel economy was an abysmal 24 MPG lifetime by the time I decided to sell it.
Now that I’ve had the CR-V for a while, I can do the math to determine whether or not this makes any economic sense purely on the basis of sipping gas.
The Subaru Forester Versus The Newer Hybrid CR-V
Above is what my Forester looked brand new and, as I remember it, what it looked like when I got rid of it. Just a totally decent crossover. What’s curious about Subaru is that it sort of gives off this vibe of being efficient, but many of its vehicles end up being a little below average. With the introduction of hybrids, Subaru has fixed a lot of its own issues in this regard (and the hybrid is definitely the one to get).
The goal, though, is to compare it to my older vehicle. With the CR-V Hybrid, I’ve tracked the fuel economy very closely since first getting the vehicle. The total number of vehicle miles driven since acquiring the car in the summer of 2024 has been 17,874, but the first 52 miles were before I started tracking, so my fuel economy estimate is based on 17,822.9 miles. In that time, I’ve used one gallon of gas for every 37.5 miles driven, for an MPG of 37.5 and a total fuel usage of 475.3 gallons. This is almost dead-on where the EPA estimate is. Assuming an average cost of $3.55, my total money spent on fuel was about $1,687.23.
I didn’t track fuel economy for the full life of the Subaru, but once I decided to start tracking it, I ended up with an average of 24 MPG. If I’d kept the Subaru and driven the same amount, that would have required 742.6 gallons of fuel, or $2,636.30, which means in a little more than two years I’ve saved about $949.07, or roughly a car payment each year.
That’s not nothing, but it’s not really a big enough savings in just gasoline to justfy getting rid of the Subaru. I did sell the car at a good time and got a high value for my resale (another nice thing I can say about my Forester), so there was a secondary benefit there. If fuel prices get closer to averaging $4.00, then that’s about $500 a year in savings. Gas prices would have to get to $6.00 a gallon before I’m saving enough money each year to feel like it made sense on fuel savings alone, and even then it’s a stretch.
A Non-Gas-Powered CR-V Versus A Hybrid
Ok, what if I’d have gotten a CR-V non-hybrid instead of a CR-V Hybrid? At the time, a CR-V non-hybrid got 29 MPG combined and cost about $3,000 less. At an average of $3.55 a gallon, that’s $494.53 saved. At an average fuel cost of $4.00 a gallon, it’s $557.22. Not great, not terrible. Because I don’t drive the exact same amount each year, it’s maybe easier to figure this out by looking at a per-mile cost.
At $4.00 a gallon, I spend about $0.107 per mile driven in my CR-V Hybrid. The non-hybrid CR-V is $0.138, and the Forester is $0.148. I’ve already made up $557.22 of my delta in this scenario, so I just need to make up $2,443. That comes to a break-even around 80,000 miles, which isn’t bad.
If gas prices go down, then it’ll be a little longer, but I plan to own this vehicle until at least 100,000 miles. At that distance, I’ll eventually be quite happy with my decision. My costs to maintain the CR-V have been lower so far and, at least in theory, I’ll spend less money on brakes than with a non-hybrid over the distance.
Climate Plays a Role as Well, Plus I Think I’m Driving Slower
Admittedly, the mild summer I’ve had in New York this year has played a big role. I reset the B trip meter when it gets cold, and reset it again when it gets warm. So far, I’ve put 4,422.7 miles on Big Red since it turned warm in roughly April of this year, and I’ve done an incredible 39.8 MPG over that period. At the end of a very cold winter, I saw the car’s MPG drop closer to 34 MPG.
Hybrids, like electric cars, tend to perform worse in the winter, and Big Red has not been an exception. If it’s a mild winter, I may luck out and improve, or at least maintain, my current high fuel economy.
I think I’m also driving more efficiently. As I wrote shortly after getting the CR-V, the game I play with myself is trying to see how long I can go just on battery power. That’s still something I do because of the car, so I think it gets credit.
I’m happier overall with the CR-V than the Forester, have spent less at my local Honda dealer than I did at the Subaru dealership, and don’t have to deal with CVT woes on account of the CR-V not really having a transmission. The Forester handled a little better, but the slightly softer ride in the Honda more than makes up for it in city driving.
With gas prices being where they are, getting more than 500 miles out of a tank of gas also just feels better, even if the economics of it don’t necessarily justify making the switch purely for fuel economy reasons.
All photos: Matt Hardigree
Wow. Just imaging how much you would have saved if you bought an EV instead of a hybrid. I pay about $3 in electricity per 100 miles when I charge at home.
Your post made me have a look at the fuel economy I’ve gotten in my 2026 CR-V hybrid since I bought it last November. It’s at 42.2 mpg over 11,140 miles. I’m on the Gulf Coast and my commute is 24 miles round trip per day. Overall, I’m very pleased.
If you want to track your Car’s service, mileage, and Costs, look at the Acar program for your phone. I’ve been using it for the last 22 years, and i find it helpful for track everything and getting alerts when service are due.
Imagine, how much gas I save by switching to a proper EV.
lol I just made a really similar comment, but I didn’t read yours yet!
So true! I mean going from 24 MPG to 37 MPG is a rounding error compared to savings from switching to a BEV.
And that doesn’t even take into account savings from less maintenance.
I can’t believe that I am commenting on this, but I sheepishly have to agree that the new CR-V is a very decent car. My mom had a light blue 2010 CR-V she bought when our 1995 Accord wagon died on the Honda lot after engine started eating itself on the way for a service (she is extremely careful when it comes to cars, so not her fault). The CR-V was never a joy to drive, it felt slow, heavy and uninspired. However, it was reliable and safe and a decent car for my mom’s needs- she only drove it over summers until she retired in 2017 then it was her daily until then, getting around 29mpg and had AWD for the Michigan winters.
This spring she bought a 2026 model and while I was expecting to hate it, it has quickly become the best modern car I’ve been in. The fuel milage is excellent, and so is the handling in her sport touring trim. It looks nice without being over done unlike the Rav-4 she was comparing it to. The seats are nice, ergo-dynamics are all spot on and the only fault that I can think of is with the sport suspension it rides a bit hard and hitting a bump while going around sweeping corners at higher speeds the back tends to feel less planted.
If I didn’t have a self-imposed rule to only own 2 door sports cars, I’d be happy to own one for a commuter and baby hauler. For now, I get to borrow her’s whenever we are back in Michigan and am happy to grab the Honda key for once.
We aren’t going with any further gas powered vehicles. We have been leasing a Chevy Equinox EV for almost two years. Hands down and especially now- the cheapest way to drive. Its $150 a month to charge at home. My wife uses it as the commuter-mobile. We’re replacing it probably with another used EV when the lease is up.
We test drove a Cr-V and it was… next to the Prius we formerly owned- about the most limp-wristed, almost literal appliance like vehicle I’ve driven. And at the end of the day? 38MPG ain’t cheap anymore.
Either your electricity is extremely expensive, or your wife drives a lot! I spend about $30-$40 per month charging at home, and average about 1,000 miles per month.
She does. As in- her company requires her to drive to work 5 days a week which adds up to something like 25,000 miles per year. The car now has over 50,000 miles on it. So its a Commutin’ machine.
That compared to her other car, a Subaru which maybe gets 38MPG. It had to be filled up on Monday and Friday. 17 gallon tank. Its now $6.20 a gallon here. It would be $500+ per month. For a Subaru.
So yeah, $150 a month versus $500 per month. Seems like a no brainer.
Wow! That is a lot of driving! So I’m guessing you’re going to buy out your lease when it ends? That’s like double the typical lease allowance on a per-year basis, so the overage fees would be pretty steep.
Yeah and the ONLY reason we got it was due to:
A: gas costs
B: Don’t wear out the Subaru
C: Leases were dirt cheap
We are looking at used Mustang Mach E’s which despite the brand are proving to be very reliable. But because of said brand, people assume they’re junk. So now they are dirt cheap used. If the dealer comes back and practically gives us the Chevy…. sure. Seems like its reliable. Hell- its even easy on the tires. They still look new.
Mach-E’s are still holding their value pretty okay around where I live. They’re like 20% more than similar spec/mileage Ioniq 5s, probably because they’re so reliable and Hyundai has the whole ICCU issue.
I like the Mach-E’s a lot. They have really nice interiors. I don’t think I could live with 400v DCFC speeds after being spoiled with my Ioniq 5 though.
I commute about 500 miles per week. Initially, I started it with my 10mpg Jeep TJ, costing me between $150 to $175 per week in gas (back when it was around $3.50 per gallon). Then I switched over to a 50mpg Kia Niro, which could go one whole week on a single tank of gas, so about $40 per week (again, at $3.50 per gallon). Now, with my EV6 I can charge up at home when rates are low for around $40 per month (I just checked and my rolling 30 day total right now is $31.94). Granted, if I were using public DCFC chargers the EV costs would no longer be competitive. But were I not able to charge at home I’d have purchased another Niro instead of the EV6 – the Niro is a great little hybrid and only needed basic maintenance when it departed my hands at 200,000 miles.
Excuse my mental gymnastics as I justify my 20 mpg german sedan drinking premium while my wifes toyota hatchback sips on gruel and gets mid 30s with a check engine light on.
Both factors combine means my fuel cost is double.
I certainly could get something more fuel efficient but its a nice place to be while I seethe at my commute and realize that the top gear clk black review has the line “ensure the oil is warm before driving enthusiastically” syncs up perfectly with when I merge on the highway.
Your math is off, for the two cars together you have to add the numbers, so you get 50 mpg. Here, saved you some money for free
Thanks, I’ll try this out the next time I fill up and see that meter run distressingly close to 3 digits
You bought a newer vehicle, and spent how much more to get the CR-V over what you sold the Subaru for? That $3K delta is between two CR-Vs, not between what you got for the Subaru and what you paid for the Honda. How long with that take to pay off with your savings? How much more do you pay for insurance? Fuel is only 15-25% of total operating costs. You hated the Subaru, and liked the Honda – the mileage improvement isn’t financially sound. I drove my 2012 Fusion for 130K miles, 25MPG overall. Cost to own? Changed the rear brake pads, spark plugs at 110K miles, regular oil/filter service, everything except the driver side heated seat was factory-fresh. MPG is just a small part of total cost.
That’s all well and good, but my numbers guys say otherwise. According to those fine lads and lasses, they claim a fuel shark will outperform that by eleventeen frillion percent.
I swapped a Forester for a CR-V for exactly the same reasons; even my 2016 CR-V gets a consistent 28mpg with mostly city driving while the 2005 Forester manual was like 23 on the highway.
Subaru Forester might be vehicle that most fits the old boat idom. The happiest day with them is buying and getting rid of them. Subaru dealers still calling me trying to sell me new Forester they sitting on tons of them.
Still, it’s nice knowing you’ve put less CO2 into the atmosphere, which has a value.
What you’ve perfectly illustrated is that there is zero financial sense to trade-in a functional car, on the premise of fuel savings alone.
But when you do look to buy a new (to you) car, you should definitely consider fuel consumption.
Depends… Going from an 8mpg truck to a 20mpg truck saves you 750 gallons of fuel over 10k miles (1250 vs 500), but switching from a 30mpg car to a 40mpg car saves you 83 gallons (333 vs 250).
750 gallons per year is painful, 83 is a rounding error.
In this situation there is more then just fuel savings. Forester would bite you in the ass before long. It’s best to get rid of the pos while it still has some value.
Then I wouldn’t consider it functional. Would you?
Functional…till it isn’t.
Functional enough to pawn off on some poor sob. That’s a Forester whole life.
Yeah, you have to do the math for your driving situation. You *can* come out ahead, but for a lot of people they are better to stick with what they’ve got.
Twenty-odd years ago diesels seemed very attractive. But you also paid a premium for one over a gasoline engine. It was going to take a lot miles to recoup that. A long commute or frequent long trips could have made it work, but that simply wasn’t a driving pattern in our household.
I know car prices and loans are out of control, but equating almost $950 to a single car payment feels insane.
Given about 1 in 5 new loans has $1,000 (or more) per month payments, it is (sadly) not as insane as you’d think.
He equated $950 to a car payment/year over the last 2 years, thus 2 car payments. i.e. about $475/payment.
Actually pretty reasonable compared to what a lot of folks are paying. I just got quoted $1475/month on the outrageous-interest-rate car loan I was offered at the dealer yesterday. I don’t borrow to pay for toys, but apparently lots of folks are doing this.
I appreciate this comment. I groaned at $975/month for a CRV but shrugged it off as that seems to be semi normal now.
Yeah, I had to read his sentence twice to understand what he was saying. I also thought he said that $975 was one month’s payment the first time.
We have a ’26 CRV Sport Hybrid 2WD bought nearly a year ago. We have gotten 41 mpg since new, 75% highway driving in AZ. Just around town it’s over 44mpg. The torque is excellent in stop and go traffic.
Why is the Autopian, the world’s best automotive site, always comparing EVs and Hybrids, and ICE cars solely thru mpg, and not adding the cost of the electricity? Then not considering the resale value where the EV Part stands for Extreme losses Value? The cost for parts is more expensive but the need for parts less. Seems the required maintenance is higher with an EV but I am not positive. Can we get a from new through average years of ownership to resale value sold with gas and electricity and installed charger costs or electric cost at fast charging not cheap overnight charging?
You might be surprised to hear that this car is NOT a plug-in hybrid. Therefore, there is NO electricity cost! The high voltage battery in a non-plug-in hybrid is charged by regenerative braking and the actions of the hybrid system, including managing the CVT. Ultimately, the electricity comes from the gasoline that is burned by the engine.
So what you’re saying is he forgot to add the value of the electricity he’s saving! Also, since this is NOT a hydrogen powered vehicle, he’s saving a whopping 100% on H!
My god, it’s full of stars!
This is a regular hybrid, not PHEV (no electrical cost), and definitely not an EV with its crazy depreciation. Plenty of owners just drive them like a regular ICE and enjoy the ++fuel economy. Check out Rav4 hybrid and CRV hybrid used values – they hold their value very well, unfortunately.
Okay buddy, chill out. We get it. I’m sure the giant oil corporations thank you for your subservience.
EVs require wayyyy less maintenance than ICE vehicles, not to mention electricity is substantially cheaper than gas even with the biggest, most inefficient EVs.
While you’re wrong about this particular car, and therefore your larger point got missed, I do think you have a point. Edmunds had a possibly copy written thing about the 5-year total ownership of a car that I always loved!
Resale is really hard though, because while many EVs depreciate faster than gas cars, some EVs actually do have decent resale value (mostly Tesla). While EVs in general have been around a while, we are still in the phase where most new EVs are the first EV in their category from that manufacturer, which makes accurate estimation very difficult to predict. Small changes in gas prices can make a huge difference here as it both makes EVs much cheaper to operate and also increase their resale (all relative of course).
The EV depreciation issue can be solved by leasing or buying used. But as you mentioned, not all EVs depreciate at the same rate. Resale values for used Ioniq 5s have gone up quite a bit since the start of the war in Iran. Luxury EVs still seem to be extremely hard-hit by depreciation, especially from startup companies like Rivian and Tesla.
“Seems the required maintenance is higher with an EV but I am not positive”
I’m at 126000 miles in my bolt ev, and outside of tires and windshield repairs, I’ve spent about $50 in scheduled maintenance (and a few hundred to fix chevy’s screwups that should have been covered under warranty, but covid delayed fixing).
Wait, wait: you had a Subaru Forester??
Tell us more!!
Of course the Honda is a better experience, especially in the “back to the dealer” department. Should have picked one instead of the Subaru in the first place, and you’d probably still be driving it.
I probably would be!
We have owned three Subaru vehicles and they have been fine.
Our current Outback 3.6R has a CVT and it is fine.
I’m glad your Honda CR-V is also fine.
We moved from the midwest to AZ so ground clearance and AWD are no longer a priority, but where else can we get a station wagon?
That’s what’s so frustrating… if you want a wagon, you basically have to get a lifted AWD vehicle or a fancy German one.
Our ’21 Outback has, so far, been the most reliable vehicle we’ve ever owned. It’s at 60k miles with zero trips to the dealer for any reason under warranty, zero non-scheduled-maintenance work required.
One thing I hate about MPG as a measure of efficiency is it doesn’t scale well in real world use and past about 30-35MPG the big number looking improvements are pretty insignificant. Here’s how many gallons it would take to drive 1000 miles in 5 MPG increments:
10MPG = 100G
15MPG = 66.7G
20MPG = 50G
25MPG = 40G
30MPG = 33.3G
35MPG = 28.6G
40MPG = 25G
45MPG = 22.2G
50MPG = 20G
By simply switching from a 10MPG vehicle to a 15MPG vehicle you’ve saved more fuel on that one trip than someone else switching from a 20MPG vehicle to a 50MPG vehicle. That 30MPG improvement between 20 and 50 sure does sound a lot more impressive than the 5MPG improvement between 10 and 15, but it actually accomplishes less.
Math works out.
and I even made it to 35 without having to use a calculator!
As someone with an 8MPG F250 in the fleet all I can say is… *sigh*. (And yes I’m excited that the Telo is rated to tow 8000#)
Exactly! I keep banging on about this too. Thinking of how many gallons per 1000 miles really puts things into perspective. Two mpg doesn’t sound like much at 10 mpg but it’s saving or using quite a bit of fuel.
Thus the EU reporting fuel economy in l/100km. Same result as your math above.
Canada too, but most folks prefer MPG for some reason. l/q00km is far more instructive for actual $ savings.
Real math, yes!
Great comment! This perfectly illustrates why ICE cars have reached peak efficiency. There is nothing left to improve with the technology that will meaningfully save drivers money at the pump.
Meanwhile achieving over 100 MPGe with a BEV is trivial for anything normal sized.
Yep, the equivalent Liters/100km measurement used in Europe is way better.
It’s interesting how cultures affect the measurements-
US- mpg: what do I get for what I pay for?
Europe- l/100km: how much do I need to buy to get where I’m going?
That’s not surprising. In my experience it’s necessary to go at least as far back as the early 1980s to find a car with a proper CVT. If the belts aren’t out where I can see them then how am I supposed to trust the transmission?
“With gas prices being where they are, getting more than 500 miles out of a tank of gas also just feels better, even if the economics of it don’t necessarily justify making the switch purely for fuel economy reasons.”
Just imagine how much fuel you would have saved if you had purchased an Ioniq 5 (or equivalent) prior to the war-of-choice instead.
“I think I’m also driving more efficiently.”
Easy to do.
CRVs are among the slowest vehicles on the road, and can usually be found loafing along in the left lane – their drivers pretending not to notice others pass on the right….
If I had charging available where I live (in an apartment), it was definitely on the list.
The CRV hybrid is quite quick 0-50 mph and cruises nicely at criminal speeds. It’s the drivers you’ve encountered and not the car.
“It’s the drivers you’ve encountered and not the car”
That’s the joke.
I completely changed my mind about the Prius once the old ones with 200k on them became cheap enough for food delivery drivers to afford. Now I think of it as a high performance supercar much like the Altima, but these are much more cockroach like in that they simply won’t die no matter what, (they also look a bit more cockroach-ish tbh).
Yeah, it’s pretty insane how much I’m saving in “fuel” costs with my Ioniq 5, especially considering it’s as fast as proper supercars from 15-20 years ago. Like ballistically, unnecessarily fast in a way I still haven’t gotten used to. The CR-V is miserably slow by comparison.
“Gas prices would have to get to $6.00 a gallon before I’m saving enough money each year to feel like it made sense on fuel savings alone, and even then it’s a stretch.”
Those of us living in the SF Bay Area have a different take…
YMMV, indeed!
We purchased a standard CRV when they were first released. We may have gone with the hybrid, but the wait was an additional 4 or 5 months. The gas version alone on my wife’s highway focused commute is 34 mpg. Getting 2 or 3 MPG more in the hybrid wouldn’t make sense cost wise.
I’ve been sniffing around CRVs lately and found your comment very interesting. You’re dealing with a lot less complexity too.
We bought the hybrid because I don’t like CVT’s. Also the sport hybrid has nice cloth seats vs. hot leather in AZ.
Heaaaadddd gaskets on both. Something to consider when tallying fuel costs and weighing repair expenses.
I’ve been reading up on this segment because we will probably replace my wife’s car soon. I don’t think the head gasket issue affects the CRV Hybrid, it uses a 2.0L engine, not the problematic 1.5T.
It’s affecting the hybrid as well, unfortunately.
https://www.theautopian.com/heres-why-honda-is-more-than-doubling-warranty-coverage-on-its-1-5t-and-hybrid-engine-head-gaskets/
Bummer. Will probably cross it off our list then.
Well, if that warranty is extended to 10yrs/150K miles I might just go for it and sell at year 9. RAV4s have a waitlist. Forester gets worse fuel economy. Do we trust a Sportage hybrid to be any more reliable at 8-9yrs? There are CR-V hybrids actually on the lots around here, without markup.
Check out the Mazda CX50 hybrid as well. It uses the prior gen Toyota system. They look nice. They’re not marked up.
Yeah, the CX-50 is already on the short list. She’s been driving a CX-7 for 15 years and 180k miles, and the fact that it is a well-proven Toyota drivetrain instead of a brand new design is very promising.
Well the virtual CVT in the Hybrid is far less complex than the actual CVT in the non-hybrid version. Sure you have an inverter but for the most part those are super reliable and will last the life of the vehicle. Then of course you have the battery which does have a lifespan but with Hybrid vehicles the degradation is largely invisible with no significant loss of MPG or range as they age.
The next iteration of this question is about the average length of trips. Because for me the question was, if most usage during the day is under 40 miles, then a PHEV was my best bet.
Since I take a train to commute most of my way to work, the PHEV option became a big saver. Now I gas up maybe once a month. But your usage case has to match or the additional cost will never be made up.
Yeah, exactly. If I could plug-in a PHEV would have made a lot of sense for us.
I’m 8 weeks and ~1300mi in on the current tank of gas in my PHEV and I still have a little over 3/8 of a tank left.
Am I the only one who remembers a time when article titles could start with the actual information (Like “I saved XX gallons“) instead of Here/This/How, and we still read it and found it readable and just as entertaining?
Something about not starting a title with an article or adverb… eh. I’ll take my rant off the air. That ship has sailed.
Totally agree. I’ll join you on the soapbox
It the “weird trick” they use to get you to click the article. (And thankfully that phrasing seems to have died off.)
Unfortunately that sort of phrasing is what helps search engines find and display your page. And sites like this need revenue to survive. I don’t like it, but I’ve worked in marketing for over 10 years and unfortunately that’s just what you have to do if you want people to see your site. It sucks.