I’m Emme Hall from Edmunds Cars. In my video comparison, I put three practical, safe small hybrid SUVs through real-world driving, tech, cargo and value testing to see which deserves a spot in your driveway: the Toyota RAV4 Hybrid, the refreshed 2023 Honda CR-V Hybrid, and the new-for-2023 Mazda CX-50 Hybrid. Each delivers roughly 40 miles per gallon in real-world use, but they diverge in driving character, interior quality, and price. Below is everything I found, written in plain terms so you can decide which one fits your life.
Quick overview
- Toyota RAV4 Hybrid: The go-to choice in the segment — efficient, quick off the line, lots of standard safety gear. It hasn’t been refreshed since 2019, and some details feel dated.
- Honda CR-V Hybrid: Refreshed for 2023, very well-rounded, engaging to drive, and family-friendly. The hybrid powertrain is only available on higher trims.
- Mazda CX-50 Hybrid: New model for 2023 with a hybrid added this year. It borrows the RAV4’s hybrid system but delivers Mazda-style steering and nicer materials — at the cost of some cargo and rear-seat space.
Driving impressions
All three hybrids are competent, but they each give you a very different feel behind the wheel. Here’s how they compare on the essentials: acceleration, steering, ride, and brakes.
Toyota RAV4 Hybrid
The RAV4 Hybrid stands out for straight-line efficiency and punch. The hybrid powertrain makes it noticeably quicker than the gas RAV4 (more than a second quicker to 60 mph), and it’s the most fuel-efficient of the trio. Toyota includes strong standard driver aids — adaptive cruise, lane centering, and emergency braking — and they work well even in heavy traffic.
Where it falls short: the brakes feel mushy and are the weakest in our braking tests, the steering is vague with little feedback, and the engine can be noisy under load. The suspension is tuned for a comfortable, controlled ride, but the steering and brake feel hold the driving experience back.
Honda CR-V Hybrid
The CR-V is our favorite on balance. Steering is quick and communicative, the brakes are excellent (it stops about 10 feet shorter from 60 mph than the other two), and the ride never feels floaty. Lane-centering assistance is helpful without feeling intrusive. The one gripe is that the engine can protest audibly when you really stomp on it, but otherwise it’s an easy, pleasant car to live with every day.
Mazda CX-50 Hybrid
Mazda borrowed the RAV4 hybrid motor and electricals, so the character of the powertrain is familiar — but the CX-50 is heavier, so it’s nearly half a second slower to 60 mph than the RAV4. What the CX-50 does deliver is Mazda’s steering: quick, direct and heavy. It corners flatter than the others and shows minimal body roll, but the ride is firmer and the longer wheelbase can make low-speed maneuvers feel less nimble.
Braking performance is similar to the RAV4 here (worse than the gas CX-50), mainly due to tire and weight differences, but pedal modulation is good and controlled stops are easy.
“The CR‑V is universally likable — that’s why it wins the driving trophy.”
Interior and practicality
These SUVs serve families and commuters differently. Here’s what to expect from seating, visibility, storage, and rear-seat comfort.
Honda CR-V
- Near-perfect, highly adjustable seating position and excellent outward visibility thanks to large windows.
- Thoughtful small-item storage: accessible cup holders, a tray in front of the shifter for phones, and a handy small tray for keys.
- Best rear legroom of the trio, generous rear door opening (almost 90 degrees) — great for installing car seats, even rear-facing ones.
Toyota RAV4
- Big, rubberized HVAC knobs that are easy to operate with gloves; physical controls are a win for usability.
- Seats mounted at waist height for easy ingress/egress; some taller drivers wish for a lower seat height and more lateral support for spirited turns.
- Rear legroom equals the CR‑V, standard vents and ports, and visual LATCH cues for car seats — though the front-seat design may interfere with rear-facing seats.
Mazda CX-50
- Interior punches above its class: premium materials, elegant stitching and overall fit-and-finish that feel Lexus-like.
- Small-item storage is less generous — cup holders feel too far away and the center console is small. The screen sits far from the driver because it’s not a touchscreen.
- Least rear legroom and headroom of the three — taller passengers (over about 6′) may feel cramped.
Technology & infotainment
All three offer Apple CarPlay and Android Auto; they diverge on how the systems integrate and how intuitive the interfaces feel.
Mazda CX-50
Uses a non-touchscreen controlled by a rotary dial. The interface is satisfying and clicky — until you plug in Apple CarPlay. With CarPlay you get touchscreen functionality only when stationary, and once moving you must switch back to the rotary control, which makes Apple CarPlay harder to use while driving. Wireless CarPlay and Android Auto are standard, but I experienced intermittent connectivity issues. Also: four USB-C ports, wireless charging, and a nice Bose stereo.
Honda CR-V
The screen is small with dated graphics, but it’s simple and easy to operate. The gauge cluster is clear but not highly customizable. Connectivity is straightforward: four USB ports (one legacy USB-A), wireless charging, and reliable wireless CarPlay/Android Auto. No flashy tech, but it works well day-to-day.
Toyota RAV4
Largest screen of the bunch and decent voice recognition, though the system can feel a bit sluggish (older hardware). You can display more information on the gauge cluster here than on the other cars, but some features like navigation and advanced voice services require a subscription. Wireless CarPlay/Android Auto works reliably, and there are both USB-Cs and USB-A ports plus wireless charging.
Cargo and towing
Surprising facts: although the Mazda CX-50 is the largest vehicle overall, it has the smallest cargo area of the three. The RAV4 gives you the most cargo space and the best towing capability. However, when it comes to small-item interior storage, each vehicle scores roughly the same in our testing.
Value and pricing
Price differences here matter more than you might expect.
- Toyota RAV4 Hybrid: Lowest price floor. The RAV4 Hybrid is only about $1,650 more than the gas RAV4, and the base hybrid is significantly cheaper than the base hybrid CX‑50 and about $4,000 less than a CR‑V hybrid. Toyota also throws in two years of complimentary maintenance (oil changes, tire rotations), which sweetens the ownership cost early on.
- Honda CR-V Hybrid: More expensive upfront because the hybrid is only offered on upper, better-equipped trims. That means you get more features for the price, but the entry price for a hybrid CR‑V is higher. Once trimmed similarly, the price/feature balance is comparable to the others.
- Mazda CX-50 Hybrid: The hybrid option costs about $2,500 over the gas CX‑50, but it’s still roughly $3,000 cheaper than the CX‑50 Turbo. At higher trim levels, pricing is similar to the RAV4 and slightly lower than a fully loaded CR‑V Hybrid.
If price is your deal breaker, the RAV4 is the most affordable hybrid entry point and offers strong efficiency for the money.
Final verdict
After scoring driving, interior, tech, cargo and value, the results were close:
- Honda CR‑V Hybrid — Winner: Score 8.1 (awarded first place). It’s the most universally likable package: enjoyable to drive, roomy and the most family-friendly rear seat and door design.
- Mazda CX‑50 Hybrid — Runner-up: Tied at 8.1 but placed second. Excellent interior quality and sportier handling make it a great pick if you prioritize style and driver engagement, provided you can live with the reduced rear-space and quirks in infotainment.
- Toyota RAV4 Hybrid — Third: Score 7.8. Fast, efficient and packed with standard safety tech, but the vague steering, noisy motor and mushy brakes keep it from being our favorite driver’s SUV.
Which one should you buy?
- Choose the RAV4 Hybrid if you want the best value and top-notch fuel efficiency with lots of standard safety features.
- Choose the CR‑V Hybrid if you want a well-rounded, easy-to-live-with SUV that’s especially good for families and everyday comfort.
- Choose the CX‑50 Hybrid if interior quality, sharper handling and a premium feel are higher on your priority list than rear-seat space or maximum cargo volume.
If you want to dig deeper into spec-by-spec differences, long-term ownership costs, or see detailed scoring sheets, head over to Edmunds for full writeups and test data. Happy car shopping — and if you have questions about any of these models, ask away and I’ll help you sort it out.
