A new Zealander.
I had a MK1 RAV4, manual - was a great off- roader and had it for 11 years then bout a MK2. Loved that car - so versatile with the quick-remove rear seats so after 16 years ordered a brand new RAV4 and was prepared to wait , and wait, and wait!! A year into the wait, Toyota came up with the CCH. Looking at the specs, I saw it was BIGGER than my MK2!!
This raised my interest and put a deposit on one, thinking I could keep whichever one I thought suited me best.
Both arrived within a couple of weeks apart. Sold my MK2 for a good price.
As an aside, we had huge floods and many cars were written off and a used cars were in short supply and the old RAV was in good order, always serviced and done only 150K km (93K miles) sad to see it go.
Turns out that I was in two minds which I wanted to keep but my wife wanted the CCH so we sold her Suzuki Vitara (not sold in US). Again sorry to see it go but the CC was so much nicer car. Probably never needed AWD as NZ is a temperate country. We never drive in snow and rarely have frosty roads - never salted.
Had them both for a year now so happy with them both.
Both have JBL sound - I have NIHL Noise induced hearing loss from working in noisy ship's engine rooms, thus, the JBLs sound good to me.
The self parking works well but in a busy car park it's very slow and other drivers can make it problematic but the cameras are so good it's not a major issue.

 

Overall I’m very happy with my 24 SE hybrid - drives nice and the fuel economy is fantastic. Biggest flaws are lack of spare tire due to ridiculous cable placement, the significant hood gap over the headlights and poorly aligned hatch. My vehicle also came with crooked Corolla Cross badges that I had the dealer realign. The too-short middle armrest, cramped rear seat legroom and fold-not-even-close-to-flat rear seats are annoying and should have been better designed from the start.

 

I purchased a 2024 Cross hybrid XSE. Am quite pleased with it.

I wrote this in a word processing program. For reasons I am unable to explain, spacing seems off somehow. My apologies.

Essential Questions:

1. Do we like the car? Yes.
   
2. Would we buy it again or buy something else? Buy again.
   
3. Would we go on a waiting list again or buy something presently available? We would definitely get on the waiting list though it should be noted that we didn't have to buy immediately. We had the luxury of being able to wait.
   
4. Would we recommend it to others? Definitely recommend.
   
5. Is the hybrid version worth the added cost? Yes, definitely, absolutely, unequivocably.
   
6. Would we buy a Toyota Cross without the hybrid? No. There is such a difference between the conventional gas powered Cross and the hybrid version that the hybrid Cross is not only the best option but for us, it is the only option.

What do we like about the hybrid Cross?

1. Gas efficiency: Significantly better than most other vehicles on the road.
   
2. Smoothness of operation: Hybrid powertrain is exceptionally smooth.
   
3. Acceleration and handling: Hybrid powertrain has more “torque” than many other cars on the road. (Torque defined as starting power from a complete stop or rapid acceleration in an emergency handling situation.

What do we dislike about the hybrid Cross?

1. No spare tire; just a quick-fix kit. Okay for urban areas, I guess, but grossly inadequate for rural roads around Missouri's Lake of the Ozarks where we now live.
   
2. JBL Premium Audio package is a tremendous disappointment. I have provided a separate review at the end of this message.

Our experience…...



Kathy & I are delighted with the car. Gas mileage is truly exceptional. Hybrid operation is quite smooth. The hybrid version has the power I need & expect. This is an excellent vehicle, well built & solid, and delivers superior performance in all the areas I consider important.



I should point out the phrase “all the areas I consider important” is relevant. I had devoted quite a bit of time to researching all the different vehicles in this market segment. The process of researching the different vehicles helped me develop a very clear sense of what I needed, and what I didn't.



My assessment is that the Cross hybrid delivers on what it promises, and in most cases, exceeds expectations.



Qualifications (things to be sure about before buying)



It should be noted that the Cross hybrid was designed to fill a particular void in Toyota's line-up. It is a smaller SUV which is fundamentally utilitarian in nature. It scores massive points – truly massive points – for delivering what it promises. Please note that the phrase “delivering what it promises” is important here. It doesn't promise everything and may fall short if you make too many assumptions.



The Cross hybrid is smaller than most other SUVs. If you need more storage space in the back, and more legroom in the back seats, then some other vehicle will be more appropriate to your needs. In our particular case, the size is appropriate to what we need and use.



This is not an off-road vehicle. It is not designed to go where there are no roads.



That being said, fair to poor roads are not an obstacle. We live on a gravel road which is uneven, curvy, and has a very steep grade. We have had absolutely no problems even in bad weather or when it is necessary to pull partially off the road in order to let another vehicle pass. The unpaved road between us and the post office is inadequate for the volume of traffic it gets. Ruts, holes, and water run-off is a problem. The Cross hybrid does well though any road below this standard of maintenance would likely challenge the capacity of the car to crawl over huge ruts and gaps.



Size . . .



We determined that we needed a smaller SUV. Only on rare occasions do we need a large amount of cargo space. Only occasionally is the back seat used for transporting adults, and then only for shorter distances. If we hauled a lot of stuff more often or frequently carried full sized adults any distance, then the Cross hybrid might be less appropriate.



But for us, the size is ideal. I didn't want to pay for a larger vehicle plus pay for the gas to run a larger vehicle plus pay insurance and pay taxes on a larger vehicle. The Cross Hybrid is the size we needed. Our canine companion finds the back seat to be quite comfortable. The same applies to kids and bags of groceries (bags of groceries are good passengers because they don't complain about anything).



Kathy & I live in the Lake of the Ozarks where there are many, many hills & curves. All wheel drive is something I need just to get up the hill leading to our house (gravel). This past winter wasn't all that bad so I haven't had experience using the car in heavy snows or in an icy environment. Then again, I lived most of my life in Kansas City which has weather quite similar to the Ozarks (where we live now) so I learned how to operate a vehicle in poor road conditions.



All Wheel Drive



I should point out that AWD is beneficial in the spring when the road turns to mud. I just go up the hill, carefully & deliberately, but without ever slipping. The Cross hybrid does its job properly and safely.



General Notes on Hybrid



I should also point out that we wanted a hybrid car. Gas prices will continue an upward trend, no matter who is president, or what happens in Gaza, or the Ukraine, or Haiti, or anywhere else. That isn't going to change so getting a hybrid made good economic sense.



I read in the car magazines, Road & Track, and Motor Trend, plus Consumer Reports and other sources that the hybrid version of the Cross has superior handling and acceleration over the gas version. I wasn't altogether clear why this was the case until I had driven my car a few weeks. Reasons for better handling became evident.



Power to motors which actually turn the wheels (traction motors) receive power from both the battery and the gas engine simultaneously, at least part of the time. When you have to hit the accelerator hard, electric power is able to energize the traction motors before the gas engine is able to really rev up, and at that, it is a responsive engine. It may only be a fraction of a second before the gas engine does the work, but there are occasions when a very quick response is needed – such as every time I get to the top of the hill leading to the main road. There is a “T” intersection at the top of a steep hill, complete with a stop sign. Turning onto the main road requires considerable torque to get into motion. It is necessary to go from a dead stop into a turn and then accelerate onto the road to the posted speed limit (50 MPH). The Cross hybrid has that capacity.



Thus, my overall expectations were fulfilled, and fulfilled quite nicely. The Cross hybrid version gets excellent mileage and has better performance, too. Additionally, the car is solidly built. This is a good combination.



Road Trip . . .



Shortly after taking delivery, we took one longer road journey (to Knoxville, Tennessee where I worked a few years and still have friends) and several trips to Kansas City. I discovered a significant reason the hybrid power train has been reviewed so well.



En route to Knoxville, I decided to find out how well the car handled a long, steep segment of I-40 crossing the Cumberland Plateau. I was trying out a new car to see what it could do in an especially challenging environment. There is possibility that I was climbing at a speed conceivably above the posted speed limit. I will exercise my Fifth Amendment rights against self-incrimination by refusing to say anything more than that. I will say, however, testing a new car to see how it handled one of the most demanding situations you can put a car in (steep hills, heavy loads, and at high speeds). My Cross hybrid handled it without straining. I was impressed. (Having learned what I wanted to know, I returned to my careful, law-abiding style of driving that I always, always, always undertake (most of the time, anyway) so as to ensure the maximum level of safety …....... and to keep my insurance rates down.)



Getting back to my point about the Cumberland Plateau, the ruling grade on I-40 in this territory is 4% which is one of the more severe inclines allowed on interstate highways. The rise continues for quite a distance. The road goes down a little here and there, but then the steep grade resumes.



The vehicle was weighted down with two adults in the front seats plus a larger canine companion in the back seat plus a full load of luggage in the back. I don't know the total weight of people/dog/cargo, but it was quite a bit.



As noted, the Cross hybrid handled it without straining. There is a display screen which can show where power is coming from and where power is going. The engine didn't strain excessively because it wasn't the sole provider of power. The battery fed additional power to the traction motors, and it was that power which provided necessary energy to deal with the steepest mountain grades. With the hybrid electricity being used, the gas engine could run at a more or less continuous speed rather than straining to handle extreme sections of the grade. Revs went up and down but did so smoothly rather than screaming to deliver that last ounce of power, as can happen with conventional gasoline engines – and diesel powered 18 wheelers that I was passing.



Gas mileage wasn't especially good when climbing steep hills at speed and with a heavy load, but then again it wasn't bad. Gas mileage going up the hill was doubtless better than 99% of the other vehicles on the road at the same time. Going down the mountain re-supplied the batteries with power because of regenerative power. This is when the traction motors turn into generators because the weight of the vehicle pulls it down the hill.



Handling . . .



Consumer Reports did considerable testing of the Cross Hybrid in zero to sixty trials; also accident avoidance trials (where the vehicle must accelerate very rapidly to avoid some problem or another, or stop very quickly). The Cross hybrid tested very well in these trials. My experience corresponds with that reported by Consumer Reports. I suspect this is because the heavy battery is mounted under the rear seat, thereby shifting the weight balance between front and rear to the center. The hybrid version is also somewhat bottom heavy.



I personally experienced the value of accident avoidance handling on I-70 near Kansas City when a lunatic switched lanes from behind a slower moving truck into my lane with almost no space between us. My own emergency avoidance maneuver tested the limits of the vehicle, and I was quite satisfied with the handling. I also uttered a few personal observations about the other driver, none of which need be quoted here. Use your own imagination and you will probably be right on it.



I've also tried it out on Ozark back roads and have found my vehicle to be satisfactorily nimble on the plethora of curves, some of which are sharp and are oftentimes in combination with a hill. Again, I find myself satisfied with handling. The reality is that the height of any SUV is going to make it at least somewhat imbalanced. As a consequence any SUV is not going to have the handling characteristics of a sports car.



The car mags and Consumer Reports reported a little sway on curves, though all reported the hybrid version of the Cross as better than the gas-only version (it should be noted that emergency stopping distances are factored into their assessment). As I noted before, I am speculating the reason pertains to the weight and location of the massive battery. The massive battery appears to have been used to shift the center of gravity along with front/back weight distribution. I also understand the Cross Hybrid body is slightly shorter than most SUVs so the ratio of the wheelbase to the total body length has bearing upon handling (lower height and equalized front/rear weight ratio = better handling). Regardless of the reason(s), I have found handling to be satisfactory.



I should acknowledge that handling -- while very good -- falls short of the truly exceptional. Then again, this is no sports car. My comments go back to what I said earlier: the Toyota Cross hybrid delivers on what it promises. It was not designed to be a sports car – and it isn't. But for routine driving and even an occasional emergency maneuver, the Cross hybrid is entirely competent. If you want a sports car, then buy a sports car.



Interior space . . .



Both the car mags and Consumer Reports noted the rear seat isn't particularly spacious. I carry people in the back seat only occasionally, and then for relatively shorter distances. Thus, space in the back sear isn't an issue to me. If my demands were different, I might prefer a different vehicle. For what I need, the Cross hybrid has both back seat and cargo space which is entirely sufficient. That may be different than what you need. A carefully thought out assessment of your own needs is absolutely essential. This applies no matter what vehicle you are considering buying.



Miscellaneous notes . . .



Our Cross hybrid is equipped with some device which will help re-direct you into your own lane if you wander a bit. On interstate highways, this is great; a real asset especially if you are tired. On curvy roads, it can be annoying. I sometimes turn it off.



There is a lot of glass in the passenger compartment. In heavy traffic, good visibility is an asset.



Our Cross hybrid is equipped with one device which makes modest changes in the direction of the headlights to correspond with turns you are making. Initially, I thought this was sort of foolish and unnecessary. After three months of ownership, I now like this feature. Quite useful and a real asset on curvy roads in the dark -- or in the rain or snow.



I read one interesting article which says that vehicle owners should periodically check a filter for a fan which provides cooler air to the big hybrid battery (fan & filter are located under the rear seat). The writer claimed that you can vastly improve the useful lifespan of those batteries merely by checking the filter regularly, and cleaning or replacing the filter as necessary. The writer said that a few seconds invested in regularly checking the filter can save customers thousands upon thousands of dollars later on. Makes sense to me. Good maintenance saves money in the long run.



There is no spare tire and I see this as a significant deficiency in rural areas. If you have a flat tire in the city, Toyota will send a tow truck to do something about it. See how long it takes in a rural area to get anybody to do anything given distances involved. Lack of a spare tire, even one of those skinny, short distance things, is a shortcoming.



JBL Premium Audio



I find the JBL premium audio to be a disappointment. They are expensive; nearly a thousand bucks after you factor in sales tax on the vehicle. They are good enough, I suppose … but for that price I expected something better.



First and foremost, there appears to be sound processing software which cannot be turned off. Most notably, mid-range sound appears unnecessarily boosted, much like what some (but not all) FM radio stations use to make music sound loud. “Optimod” audio processors used by some radio stations “optimize” the “modulation” (loudness) of the radio station's signal. “Optimize” is a code word for “louder.” But a clear, crisp sound? Naaa.



This is okay … I guess … for most rock music and country music. Those recordings are already pushed and squeezed and adjusted quite a bit from the time the recording leaves the studio to when it is sold.



If, however, you prefer real and actual sounds then audio processing sounds artificial. Upper frequency notes are trimmed & compressed so as to make the mid-range sound seem more evident. If a recording employs violins or upper register woodwinds, clipping the upper frequency is annoying at the least, and sounds completely fake, otherwise. Lower frequency notes from a tuba or double bass become blobby. Both upper register and lower register notes become indistinct.



Mid-range notes are adequately reproduced though can also be indistinct to the point of being tedious.



Audio processing alters the dynamic range of music and in so doing creates a fake sound. For some rock groups, an artificial sound is what they want to achieve. It is a legitimate artistic objective. I don't particularly like that approach but just because I don't like something doesn't make it bad. For music which is intended to be clear & precise (classical & jazz, for example), JBL Premium Audio doesn't deliver. (Interestingly, opera is different from concert symphonies. Opera focuses on mid-range sound because that's where the human voice lies. But try listening to Mahler's Ressurection Symphony. Or, don't. Very disappointing. Muddled in places; anemic in others.)



The only controls are on a screen which allows you to adjust treble, mid-range, and bass. I deem that grossly inadequate.



Trying to reclaim upper register notes after they have previously been clipped won't work. It sounds unnatural. Pumping up the treble sounds overmodulated. Anyone who suggests differently in modern, digital recordings is foolish, incompetent, a liar, or all three. Once data has been clipped, you can't put it back.



Mid-range sounds are less processed though a “muddy” sound (indistinct clarity) occasionally occurs.



Lower register sounds also can become muddy, blobby, inadequately clear, indistinct, and can easily become over-modulated.



I neither want nor need some sound engineer to tell me what I want – and even less some manufacturer's marketing rep telling the sound engineers what I want.



JBL premium audio is not bad. It's just not anything, period. It's certainly not worth the money. If I could figure out how to bypass the JBL premium audio with a $24.95 radio from WalMart, I would do it. I can plug a $24.95 radio into the JBL premium audio but it is still the JBL premium audio processing the signal. And, it sucks.



A few years ago (actually a few decades), graphic equalizers were popular on cars. I know because I had one. Those allowed the owner to make adjustments to about a dozen or so frequency variables. It would be easy enough for Toyota to program a electronic graphic equalizer onto one of their screens – and do so at what I expect would be minimal cost. Remember, graphic equalizers from a century which has now gone by used manually controlled mechanical adjustments (usually slide type “potentiometers.” Those cost money. Not today! Today, it can all be programmed into existing equipment for not much more than a few hours of programmer time.



Were JBL to invest a few bucks in programming expense, the JBL premium audio might be really, really good. Just give the buyer the option of turning off the damned-fool audio processing. Oh, and maybe programming in a graphic equalizer so the buyer could make adjustments as desired. For the amount of money JBL and Toyota is charging for a “premium audio” system, their equipment should sound better than the absolute bottom end of the market.



Oh, and don't tell me that consultants to JBL premium audio say that any change would cost mega-quadrillion dollars, and they would have to take a huge loss even if they charged another thousand dollars to every customer just to un-fix what they did before. I know how consultants multiply in all sorts of bizarre expenses just to drive up the price. Decades of experience in both the public and private sector has convinced me that many (not all, but many) consultants take intellectual prostitution to exciting new levels. So, don't screw with me. Just fix the problem.



My ratings . . .



Overall, I rate the Cross Hybrid quite favorably, though should note that particular qualities of this vehicle are exceptionally well suited to my specific needs. I had read about the hybrid version several months before Toyota actually started making them and compared those specs with those of other manufacturers' vehicles, both in production and anticipated in the near future. This particular vehicle met my specific needs far better than anything else either on the market or anticipated.



I am especially impressed with the three motor approach to hybrid operation (there is one motor to convert power from the engine into electricity, then one motor for the front wheels and a separate motor for the rear wheels to actually make the car go). I'm not aware of any manufacturer other than Toyota which presently uses anything other than a two motor system for hybrid vehicles. The three motor system has a double advantage of being more efficient and less complex. Mechanical complexity adds potential places for things to go wrong as the vehicle gets older. Higher efficiency of the three motor system translates into buying less gas.



Final assessment: My Cross Hybrid is well designed and properly assembled. I anticipate it will last a long time.

As a pending owner, my gripe about the XSE is that it seems to only come with 18" wheels, not ideal for potholes or more than mild offroading. The more sidewall, the better, and it may worsen MPG via wheel weight vs. 17" wheels. Any idea if the 17" wheels can be safely swapped in? Sometimes brake configuration or other tuning doesn't like size changes.

Your review of the JBL system is contradicted by many others, e.g. comparing it to a cheap Walmart system! You may have a lemon. There are consistently useful YouTube car audio reviews on "Daily Motor," with a positive demo of a similar Corolla Cross. What was your source material? Bluetooth (degraded audio) or direct USB? Radio?

 

As a pending owner, my gripe about the XSE is that it seems to only come with 18" wheels, not ideal for potholes or more than mild offroading. The more sidewall, the better, and it may worsen MPG via wheel weight vs. 17" wheels. Any idea if the 17" wheels can be safely swapped in? Sometimes brake configuration or other tuning doesn't like size changes.

Your review of JBL (generally speaking) was surprising. This audio reviewer is consistent with test methods, and he liked the 9-speaker JBL system in a 2022 model. This assumes hybrid stereos ought to be similar. What is your source material? Bluetooth (degraded) or direct USB? Consider that a fundamental (changeable) setting is forcing distortion on it, or you got a lemon.

 

My gripe about my 2024 CCH is the small, 10 gallon gas tank. I'm still going to get gas once per week even with great gas mileage. I traded in my 2013 Crosstrek with lousy mileage but 16+ gallon gas tank and the total range of the CCH is only slightly better. Shame on Toyota.

 

12 gallons would have been nice, but in theory you should be able to get 400+ miles from a tank unless you've got a lead foot.

 

We got rid of our 2022. The biggest issue for me was the smell of the softex leatherette that never went away and would make both of us cough and have breathing issues esp if the car was parked under the sun. We kept it in the garage with the windows rolled down all the time. It helped but 2 yrs was a long time.
We wanted a Hybrid SE so that would not have the leather but the way Toyota sells them it ends up costing as much as a RAV hybrid. It also doesn't have the spare tire. So we got a RAV4 Hybrid XLE and so far happy with the purchase. Am getting around 50 MPG but most important is the improved range of close to 600 miles on a tank.

 

'24 CCH SE: ^I've only done one long range road trip, but at 75MPH on a relatively flat freeway, we were at 38MPG (calculated). That is Toyota's expected highway rating, so y'all must be talking city MPG to get to 400 (tank is 10.6 gallons) ?

My review after 4 months:
My wife and I bought a '24 CCH SE on 2/5/2024. We paid a bit under sticker (yeah, I was surprised too!). Other than an '18 CR-V EX, this is the newest car we own. I've been interested in the CC since the non-hybrid appeared in '22, but wasn't sold on it 'til the hybrid version arrived - both for its added performance and MPG. Honestly, we didn't test drive or shop around. I decided to go w/the CCH based on reviews and the Toyota nameplate. Of the direct competitors, the only one I wish I would have given a closer look to is the Subaru Crosstrek 'Sport' - with the 2.5 engine.

Initial impressions were OK. Notable are the lack of a spare tire, jack, lug wrench and front or rear tow points and tow hook (eyelet). I had a jack and lug wrench in my collection of parts that fit in the back of the CCH (in the existing plastic pieces under the rear floor cover), and will throw in an extra tire for road trips (until Toyota offers a spare tire kit like with the Prius).

It's my wife's car, and I've only driven it a few times. It now has about 2500 miles.

We did our 1st road trip recently. It was ~450 miles each way. Overall, I'm liking the CCH, as I'm a big fan of the 'Dynamic radar cruise control'/ACC. It drives easily, tracks straight, ride is not a Lexus of course, but is comfortable. I did add a small pillow for my lumbar on the return trip (only the top-levels XSE has lumbar support via the power seats).

The trip was a good test of the MPG and power of this hybrid powertrain. The first 200+ miles were mostly flat cruising at 75MPH and we got 38MPG. The 2nd 200 was 75-80MPH, but included ups and downs from 400 to 4000 feet of elevation (Pendleton, OR to Boise, ID on I-84), and got 34MPG. The return trip saw the same numbers. So, MPG is in the ballpark, as the Est. MPG is 45 city/38 highway. Performance was adequate (I had V6 RAV4 prior to this), and didn't find it lacking for climbing the passes or passing on hills (there are a LOT of trucks on I-84!).

There is a bit of vibration and added engine noise around 2500-3000 RPM, but it's not intrusive just noticeable. Tire noise is more about the road surface than the CCH's noise levels.

One thing we'll need to test next winter is how the AWD system works when the road is icy and snow-covered. Per an online YT video review, and my own experience, the rear wheels will 'kick in' (engage) when extra power is needed, via the electric motor. Not sure if that will cause the rear-end to 'kick out' (slide)? But I have to believe Toyota's Enhanced VSC will manage it as needed.

Last tidbits: The CCH is lacking internal storage compared to the CR-V and other cars we've had, the sound quality of the base stereo is still decent for us non-aficionados, and the InfoTec/ICE is manageable even for most Luddites (like me), after some familiarization.

TL;dr>>>I'd buy it again.

 

I'm getting around 45MPG for combined city and 65MPH highway, just slightly less than my previous 2008 Prius.

My biggest issue with the CCH is the smaller usable interior space compared to the 2008 Prius, even though the CCH is 1" longer and 4" wider.

 

65mpg is stunning. The best I have got is 48mpg (USG) but the road was far from highway - look at State Highway One Taupo New Zealand to Wellington New Zealand. This was based on filling the tank
Today however, going to the hardware shop, I got 102 mpg (USG) - 2.3l/100km. This was from the Toyota trip computer which to me is optomistic.

 

Using @DRP "essential questions" my answers are below
Essential Questions:

• Do we like the car? Yes, absolutely!
• Would we buy it again or buy something else? Yes, buy it again.
• Would we go on a waiting list? Not sure. We were somewhat desperate for a new vehicle (needed to replace the aging subie within a few months). Honda, Ford, Kia, and Hyundai were all also on the list to check out.
• Would we recommend it to others? Depends on the person. No car is for everyone.
• Is the hybrid version worth the added cost? Yes! No doubt!

As with most anything, it really depends upon the user and what they need. For us, this car rocks.

Loves:

• Gas mileage: In the colder months (below freezing), we got about 34-36 MPG. In the warmer months, we are seeing 45-48 MPG with each tank. Hills and speed are MPG killers. I drive like a little old lady though so it isn't a problem 😁
• Big frickin' side mirrors! Love them.
• In praise of plastic! OK. So most folks are hating on the plastic interior. I did as well... until I started using the car every day and transporting our dogs (wet and muddy) every day. Now I love the hard plastic. Easy to clean. No claw marks like I had on my old car's softex. It reminds me of the old Honda Element. Very utilitarian.
• Drive and handling is really smooth. Not a race track car. It is an everyday car. The sexy sporty cars get the press but for most of us, we just want to get on with our day.

Hates:

• Infotainment system is unnecessarily complicated. A simple on/off button is desperately needed.
• Limited customization - you can't get what you want. I wanted an XSE because of the heated seats, better seats, and fog lights. Unfortunately it meant that I had to also get a moonroof and automatic tailgate lift. Neither of which I wanted. I wish I had the option to choose more.
• Better storage. I would love to have some seat pockets in the rear for things that are useful to have but don't need to be in front such as paper towels or a spare dog leash or a gremlin or something. Would give up all the front tech in a heartbeat to have a sunglasses pocket on the roof by the windshield. The tech in the rearview mirror is so intense that it is impossible for me to hang my parking pass from the mirror. This is kind of madness! I have to slap my parking pass on my dashboard while all the sane folks get to hang theirs. This is daft.

I have had the car 7 months and put over 12,000 miles on it. I love it and it really works for me.

 

wtdash ..... I bought a CCH XSE last January and your review is spot on. I traded in a 2013 Subaru Crosstrek which need engine gaskets and got horrible mileage. The CCH is quieter, smoother, faster, and much more fuel efficient than the Crosstrek. Unfortunately, the driving range is about the same due to the CCH 10.6-gallon gas tank. I've also noted that the fit and finish on the CCH is lacking.

Using @DRP "essential questions" my answers are below
Essential Questions:

• Do we like the car? Yes, absolutely!
• Would we buy it again or buy something else? Yes, buy it again.
• Would we go on a waiting list? Not sure. We were somewhat desperate for a new vehicle (needed to replace the aging subie within a few months). Honda, Ford, Kia, and Hyundai were all also on the list to check out.
• Would we recommend it to others? Depends on the person. No car is for everyone.
• Is the hybrid version worth the added cost? Yes! No doubt!

As with most anything, it really depends upon the user and what they need. For us, this car rocks.

Loves:

• Gas mileage: In the colder months (below freezing), we got about 34-36 MPG. In the warmer months, we are seeing 45-48 MPG with each tank. Hills and speed are MPG killers. I drive like a little old lady though so it isn't a problem 😁
• Big frickin' side mirrors! Love them.
• In praise of plastic! OK. So most folks are hating on the plastic interior. I did as well... until I started using the car every day and transporting our dogs (wet and muddy) every day. Now I love the hard plastic. Easy to clean. No claw marks like I had on my old car's softex. It reminds me of the old Honda Element. Very utilitarian.
• Drive and handling is really smooth. Not a race track car. It is an everyday car. The sexy sporty cars get the press but for most of us, we just want to get on with our day.

Hates:

• Infotainment system is unnecessarily complicated. A simple on/off button is desperately needed.
• Limited customization - you can't get what you want. I wanted an XSE because of the heated seats, better seats, and fog lights. Unfortunately it meant that I had to also get a moonroof and automatic tailgate lift. Neither of which I wanted. I wish I had the option to choose more.
• Better storage. I would love to have some seat pockets in the rear for things that are useful to have but don't need to be in front such as paper towels or a spare dog leash or a gremlin or something. Would give up all the front tech in a heartbeat to have a sunglasses pocket on the roof by the windshield. The tech in the rearview mirror is so intense that it is impossible for me to hang my parking pass from the mirror. This is kind of madness! I have to slap my parking pass on my dashboard while all the sane folks get to hang theirs. This is daft.

I have had the car 7 months and put over 12,000 miles on it. I love it and it really works for me.

I'm surprised that the 10.6 gallon gas tank isn't one of the hates. My CCH doesn't get much better range than my 2013 Crosstrek.

 

We have had our CCH - S trim for almost 1k miles now and the last tank's calculated MPG was 46.7 / starting with a full tank with the 'Distance Til Empty' calculation given was 417 miles. Our last vehicle was a 2022 Hyundai Tucson 2.5L AWD that regularly only got ~24-26 MPG with the same driving, to compare. We have been very happy with it so far.

 

To me, the 10.6 gallon gas tank is a major "fail". I still have to fill my CCH once per week just like my Crosstrek I traded in. I didn't have the luxury of time, but if I did, I would have bought the Lexus version of the CCH.

 

I enjoyed your post very much. I bought in late June 2024. I like the car except for: I haven't figured how to disable 'safety service' for the car wash. I am a retired sales person and like to keep my car clean by using city car washes. It goes nuts in the car wash. If you have any hints for me , great...but it sounds like you live in the country.
Previously I owned a long Prius which they quit making. It took me 6 months to like the Prius as I had been a 'Subaru girl' before.

I only traded in because I wanted a little more comfort. You mentioned this ~ "The reality is that the height of any SUV is going to make it at least somewhat imbalanced. As a consequence any SUV is not going to have the handling characteristics of a sports car."

Is this why I feel insecure on occasion when we cross lanes where road markers are slightly raised? ...is the car just higher so I feel wobbly? Am I just not used to driving a taller car ? maybe I am just totally used to the Prius which hugged the ground ....but boy, people often didn't see us. and my Prius V had significant blind spots.

Really, I'm just lucky I picked this vehicle. originally I wanted a Rav 4, but we live in a crowded urban area, and have a narrow driveway , so the size of the Corolla Cross is excellent...for two of us a our dog, pretty comfortable!

Except for the car wash problem I'm pretty satisfied~

 

I want to thank you for this. I didn't do enough research but like the car. Yes, it's a wee bit small in the rear. BUT, I have a skinny driveway and a Rav4 would have been too wide. i feel that i accidently lucked out picking this car. Your research and well written notes are appreciated.