Honda Ridgeline SUT

crv16 · March 2005

17 mpg is 20-30% better than the real world fuel economy of domestic full size 4x4 pickups.

jay_24 · March 2005

17 mpg is 20-30% better than the real world fuel economy of domestic full size 4x4 pickups.

We got 18+ yesterday in a Silverado. Mostly highway but some 4x4 while out on a lake.
Northern WI still has 36+ inches of ice on the lakes yet, and snow/slush on top of that.

--jay

once_for_all · March 2005

I am not looking at a domestic full size 4 x 4 pickup. I am looking for a Ridgeline. But, like I said, 17 mpg won't get me behind the wheel.

Maybe when (if) Honda brings out VCM or a hybrid, I will get it. But it will take 24 mpg real world.

John

gearhead1 · March 2005

I got 17.6 but it's still getting broke in. there's only 400 miles on it so far. I expect mpg to improve.

moparbad · March 2005

17 mpg is 20-30% better than the real world fuel economy of domestic full size 4x4 pickups
Many domestic full size 4x4 will deliver 17 mpg. Fuel economy is not a good decision factor for buying or not buying a Ridgeline.

va_vet96 · March 2005

gearhead, I'm really glad to hear about your good results in the deep sand with the Ridgeline. I like everything about the truck, but was worried that the VTM would slip and dig into the sand before putting enough traction to the rear wheels. How far did you drive in the deep sand conditions? Long stretches or just intermittent short spots? I'm planning on using it at Hatteras in the Outer Banks, NC. Long stretches of deep sand there.

xwesx · March 2005

Knowing the relative dryness of the sand would help too.... it is a lot easier to drive on wet/moist sand than dry sand.....

gearhead1 · March 2005

The sand was dry. I think these would be about 50 yard stretches of deep sand. VTM-4 Lock was not required at all which is different than the traction control that automatically engages rear wheels only when required, otherwise its pretty much a front wheel drive truck which is pretty cool. The Ridgeline notifys you that traction control engages by a light that turns on in your dash display. The traction control light only flickered occasionally on this stretch of road. I saw no indication there would be any problem even if the whole distance of this road was this deeper sand. I mean I was by no means getting a running start at these deep patches and using momentom to get to the other side. I even slowed down a bit just to feel how it would perfom just with its own traction abilities. I really thought I would need to engage VTM-4 lock before I started, but it wasn't even close to being required. I think in part bacause the truck not only had the clearence (though you could hear the sand hitting the underside of the truck), but also it's a front wheel drive truck with all the weight on the front axel which helps traction tremendously. I wish I could just take the truck out and thrash it to its limits, but I just care about it too much.

boxsky · March 2005

1st tank I got 15mpg, 2nd tank 16mpg, 3rd tank 16.5mpg. My previous Hondas didn't realy get good mileage till after 10k. Now I drive 42miles on the highway and 3 miles in city each way. But I'm doing between 65-90mph on the highway which doesn't help mpg. I expect to get about 19mpg when broken in.

55535432 · March 2005

Moparbad,

Fuel economy is not a good decision factor for buying or not buying a Ridgeline.
------------------------------------------------

Absolutely right.Don't even do the math on your potential gas expenses coz its gonna be mind buggling.LAST TIME I CHECKED THE HIGHEST PRICE ON GAS WAS $3.05 IN MALIBU CALIF.How far is that from the worse case forcast of $3.50 before the year ends.

Guys/gals please check this site and reevaluate your truck purchasing plans.

http:/www.msnbc.msn/id/7250116/.

Last week it showed the highest gas price at $2.82.(Needles CA) now its $ 3.05.When will it end?

Wonder how much gas is by year 2006. Man you gotta be thinking of contingency plans on how to dispose your trucks if gassing becomes unbearable and without losing money on a $30,000-$35,000 truck.Im beginning to hate my Frontier already, but had to enjoy the moment coz this maybe the last years that I would ever own a truck.Good thing its disposal is Nissans problem down the road and not mine.

For all folks waiting for truck prices to plummet, the wait aint that long. Spring is here (everyone goes on a roadtrip) and as the temp rises, the prices goes down.(not on gas, on the trucks only)

gearhead1 · March 2005

I love my ridgeline, but if you spend hours in traffic every day you'd have to be stupid to buy this or any truck. I've got the money and I'm happy to feed it what ever it requires. If you want to be on the cutting edge of truck engineering and refinement, buy a Ridgeline. It's a blast, of course I'm not trapped in a soul and gas sucking commute every day either.

55535432 · March 2005

Their is nothing not to love on the Ridgeline. Its a Honda, and its got protection of Fort Knox.I've test driven one for 28 minutes and indeed its a blast, no make that an explosion.

Having your family inside one is such a comfy feeling knowing that they are in a safe vehicle. That said, I live in MD,1 mile away from a 5 lane highway (route 95), 20 miles in 20 mins to and from from work. (11-am-11 pm shift means even lesser traffic) my Pilot averages 20.5 mpg (18 mpg for the Frontier). I believe I am rarely trapped in a gas sucking commute too, but these gas prices still hurt big time and their gonna hurt even more.A $ 2000-3000 savings for people who wait will be a welcome relief and make the Ridgeline ownership more enjoyable.

gearhead1 · March 2005

Safety is important, and one of the primary resons I bought it. I really feel I can send my wife out in it and it will take care of her. I defintly feel a 110 lb woman would survive almost any accident in this truck, and I know she won't be stuck and stranded in the wilderness in it. Piece of mind is priceless. I really admire Honda for instituting their "safety for all" program. They believe safety should not be an option and all their vehicles will include all safety features unlike Toyota who makes side air bags a hard to get option in their 05 taco. It should be standard. If you can save 2,000, more power to ya, but after seeing the truck in relation to the competition, I didn't feel there would be significant discounting worth waiting for. I could be wrong.

once_for_all · March 2005

"Fuel economy is not a good decision factor for buying or not buying a Ridgeline."

What? Count the costs, 4 mpg (21 vs 17) is 135 gallons less per year, which is $337 more. If I need 24 mpg, then it is $674 more. We are getting into the territory of the cost of insurance per year.

Ok, so you argue safety, AWD, trunk in the bed, resale value, etc. All valid points. But there are other cars that offer comparable features and decent gas mileage.

I am just saying fuel economy is a good decision factor, for any car or truck.

John

varmint · March 2005

"Maybe when (if) Honda brings out VCM or a hybrid, I will get it."

VCM was considered, but Honda's engineers rejected it. The Ridgeline's aerodynamics may be good for a truck, but there is only so much you can do with a pick-up. They determined that the air resistance at higher speeds would be enough to prevent the vehicle from running on 3 cylinders for any significant time.

varmint · March 2005

A poster over at TOV posted additional information regarding the towing specs. Apparently, the first printing of the owner's manuals included an incorrect chart regarding towing capacities with passengers. The revised manual should include the following.

1-2 passengers = 5,000 lbs trailer with 600 lbs tongue weight.
3 passengers = 4,750/trailer and 600/tongue wt.
4 passengers = 4,750/trailer and 570/tongue wt.
5 passengers = 4,500/trailer and 516/tongue wt.

The poster who supplied this information has proven to be very knowledgeable and his information has been reliable. That said, individuals interested in towing should wait to see these new manuals before making a purchase.

qbrozen · March 2005

Ok, so you argue safety, AWD, trunk in the bed, resale value, etc. All valid points. But there are other cars that offer comparable features and decent gas mileage.

another 4-door truck with all the same capability, features, power, etc. AND good gas mileage AND priced the same or better? Point me to it, please.

once_for_all · March 2005

that's very interesting. I wouldn't have thought that the Ridge was that much different than the Pilot in terms of aerodynamics.

Are there drag coefficients posted somewhere?

This is telling me that there may not be much hope for squeezing out more than 1 or 2 mpg more out of the Ridgeline (hybrid aside) with various technological upgrades. Not what I was hoping.

John

moparbad · March 2005

What? Count the costs, 4 mpg (21 vs 17) is 135 gallons less per year, which is $337 more. If I need 24 mpg, then it is $674 more. We are getting into the territory of the cost of insurance per year.
If the Ridgeline obtained 21 mpg there would be a cost difference. Ridgeline is obtaining 17 mpg, F150 and Silverado owners I know obtain 17 mpg, (heck, I get 17 mpg in my Tacoma and after I called BS on my uncle with his F150 and his claims of 18 mpg I drove it for a week and guess what, 17 mpg)so who is obtaining 20 or 21 mpg in a Ridgeline?
My point is that w/o a difference in real world mpg it is not a significant difference. IMO anyone spending the $6000 extra(compared to a comparable Frontier, for example purpose) is not going to sweat a 1 to 3 mpg difference.

My bottom line opinion of the Ridgeline is that it is a great truck, however, there are a lot of great truck choices available.

qbrozen · March 2005

all of this off one owner's experience with his new Ridgeline, huh? And we're stacking it up against years of other vehicles' real-world numbers? Interesting.

How about we wait till the engines get broken in?

By the by, we get between 20-21 mpg average highway/city in our Pilot. I think the aerodynamics of an open bed in the Ridgeline may cut it back 1-2 mpg. So I'd still expect 19-20 average in the vehicle.

jay_24 · March 2005

Note the Ridgeline has a different tranny and is possibly geared different, hence different MPG than the Pilot. Would the v6 suffer more when hauling a load than a v8 might? The front end of the Ridgleline appears less areodynamic than the Pilot too (larger grill opening?).

I agree 3 or 4mpg isn't a big deal when your looking at a $30K truck, unless all other things are equal. At $500 a year, it takes a long time to make up a price $4k price difference at purchase time.

I'm getting worried about Honda. They can't seem to get a simple manual correct. It appears towing for the Ridgleine is messed up and fuel grade for the Pilot too. How can they make good cars and trucks if they can't make a simple document?

Just poking a little fun at the simple mistakes.

--jay

roger1969 · March 2005

Fuel grade not 87 octane for Pilot and Ridgeline?

once_for_all · March 2005

well, so far we have at least 2 owners with mpg numbers. One had three tanks less than 17. The other owner had 17.6 mpg.

Why the fuss? ALL of you have a mpg limit somewhere, NONE of you would be buying if the Ridge only got 4 mpg.

I am just saying I won't get the Ridgeline at 17 mpg, and YMMV. That's all. I admit that it seems the perfect vehicle for me otherwise.

At this point, the price would have to come down $2,000 off MSRP before I would be tempted.

John

whaleya · March 2005

I have just bought a RL to replace my 99 Tacoma.

I wanted something with better safety features and better handling. Sure it's not as good off road rock crawling, but for typical off roading like fire roads, ect it's great. I love the back seats that fold up, it gives me lots of room for the dog to be on the floor. The backup camera will be great for towing and dual climate control with a filter is a plus. My Tacoma was always getting gritty on the inside from driving on dirt roads.

Living in snow country the fact that it has full time 4wd is a huge plus, I was sick and tired of shifting the Toyota in and out of 4WD depening on the roads I was on.

The inside is nice, but a bit too much hard plastic. I think that Honda has a bit of a complex building thier first truck and tried a bit too hard to make it "trucky" on the inside.

It combines the best of SUVs and small pickups. For someone like me that needs a comfortable car to and from work, and a pickup for home repair and camping, as well as a real back seat and full time 4WD and great handling, this is it.

It's not perfect and may not have the correct image of a pickup truck, but it does everything I need a truck to do.

I was also considering the 4runner (too little headroom), GX470 (odd rear door), new Tacoma and the new Frontier and Pathfinder.

whaleya · March 2005

I honestly have no idea what my MPG is (still on the first tank).

I was planning on getting a Prius this spring, had been a list for 11 months, before deciding to trade the Tacoma for the RL. The frustrating thing is that the cost of insurance for an additional car was greater than any fuel savings by driving the Prius during the week and a truck on the weekends on road trips and this is before considering depreciation.

xwesx · March 2005

I found the same thing. I was going to use a Honda Gyro (do any of you even know of this?!) - an old three-wheeled scooter from the early '80s. The thing gets about 75 mpg with a top speed of about 45 mph, but for a 13-mile commute and a selection of routes, it was not a bad deal. Problem was, the monthly insurance was cost prohibitive. By the time I add up all the additional costs of insurance, etc., it is about the same as if I drove my TRUCK ('69 C20) to work every day... and it only gets about 10.5 mpg. That's not even to mention the added inconvenience of driving the Gyro. So.... so much for envronmentally friendly. I have to look to the pocketbook.

Oh, I guess I should mention that I DO NOT drive the truck every day, I drive my Subaru, so the mileage is about double of the C20. Therefore, money is saved by not implementing the Gyro.

qbrozen · March 2005

OK, so, just to be clear, are you saying you wouldn't buy the Ridgeline or ANY similar vehicle due to mileage? You are holding out until someone makes a versatile 4-door pickup that can achieve mileage in the mid-20s?

That's fine. That's your perogative, certainly. Its just a bit odd to knock a vehicle for not doing what no other vehicle is doing, so I think that's where the controversy is coming in to play.

jay_24 · March 2005

According to some 2005 Owners manuals for Pilots the Octane rating is 89 or 91. I can't remember. Check out the Pilot board. It was a mistake and the real rating is 87. But the mistake confussed even some dealers that told customers to use the higher octane.

golfboy1 · March 2005

I drive a 04 Dodge Quad Cab 1500 (not a HEMI) and I am looking at the Ridgeline for the fuel economy. What kind of MPG can I look forward to? I have about a 60 mile round trip highway commute and currently I get 14.7 avg MPG. Unfortunately I am 6'3" and I do not fit in cars so a truck is my only alternative. What kind of mileage are you all getting?

once_for_all · March 2005

yep, you got my drift.

The Subaru Baja is already in the upper 20's mpg. But I don't fit in it and it has other limitations (bed size, payload mainly). Otherwise, the Subbies are very reliable, cost in the low 20's, and have a great AWD system.

I will be checking out the new Ford Sportrac in 2007. Or, maybe Honda will do something on the mpg by then. Hopefully the latter, because I have never been a big fan of Ford's despite owning several of their cars and trucks.

John

once_for_all · March 2005

see the main Ridgeline forum, there is lots of discussion (and speculation) there. We only have 4 tanks reported, 3 were around 16 mpg and 1 was at 17.6.

I am 6'3" too and the Ridge would be perfect, but I am doing a wait and see because of the mpg issues.

John

gd113 · March 2005

I have had my RTS one week and filled up once. Got 16 mpg in mostly city driving. I am 6'2" and this truck is perfect. Plenty of headroom and legroom.

crv16 · March 2005

"Unfortunately I am 6'3" and I do not fit in cars so a truck is my only alternative."

I'm 6'4"/200 lbs, and fit in a Civic.

golfboy1 · March 2005

I drive a 04 Dodge Quad Cab 1500 (not a HEMI) and I am looking at the Ridgeline for the fuel economy. What kind of MPG can I look forward to? I have about a 60 mile round trip highway commute and currently I get 14.7 avg MPG. Unfortunately I am 6'3" and I do not fit in cars so a truck is my only alternative. What kind of mileage are you all getting?

xwesx · March 2005

If you read back up the line a bit, you will see that folks are getting about 17 mpg right now with their very new trucks.

once_for_all · March 2005

17 may seem ok to you, but I see it as a new oxymoron: "gas hog" and "Honda" in the same sentence. Come to think of it, some of the Ody owners have reported upper teens also; so maybe it isn't such a novelty.

John

qbrozen · March 2005

Ok, but there you go again blaming Honda for this. Obviously, since you have yet to show me a comparable vehicle that does better on mileage (and, again, we're looking at 2 examples of new vehicles, which does not a precedent make), this is not Honda-specific. So its obviously what you can expect from this type of vehicle, and does not mean Honda somehow made something with inferior mileage when compared to similar vehicles.

gearhead1 · March 2005

The Ridgeline requires 86 or more octane fuel. I'm the one that got 17.6 mpg on my second tank. My first tank was 16 mpg. There was improvement just from the first to the second tank, and I fill up at the halfway point, so everyone relax. The engine has just under 500 miles on it. It's not even considered broken in till 600 miles according to the manual. I fully expect this to improve

once_for_all · March 2005

not blaming Honda, just disappointed. Honda obviously wanted to juice up this vehicle so that it would compete with the big boys. It is all marketing. Honda can make an efficient Ridgeline (and probably will, since this is their bread and butter reputation) but choose not to. The downside is they get criticized for hogging gas.

Every vehicle made is slightly different, so we will never have apples to apples. You ask for a comparable vehicle, and I gave you a couple examples of what compares the most right now: the Subaru Baja and the '07 Sportrac.

In my opinion, the IRS and AWD are what separates out this class. The Taco and Frontier are disqualified because of lack of IRS and AWD systems. The Baja concept is a great idea but Subaru missed the market by not making the cab and bed size adequate. Since I drive an '03 Forester with the same engine and get 27 to 28 mpg, I know the Baja can do the same. Furthermore, the Baja Turbo could run rings around the Ridgeline and still get 24 mpg.

There isn't going to be a direct comparison yet. But in 2007, I think there will be more options, and Honda will need to be stepping up to the plate with their own improved version.

John

qbrozen · March 2005

There are others that compare more directly. The Baja is not even close in size.

The current SportTrac is very close, but you do realize it gets even worse mileage than the Ridgeline, right? Of course, neither of us can speak to the '07 yet.

The Tacoma 4-door, as some others have pointed out, is a decent comparison. But even with its lighter weight, it still only gets 1 mpg better city mileage and the same as the ridgeline on the highway.

Frontier 4-door is also pretty close, and, once again, gets worse mileage than the ridgeline.

From what I can see, based on the current market, the Ridgeline is right on target.

By the by, I'm shocked at your Forester numbers. They must have made some great improvements since we were never able to top 23 mpg in ours - which is the vehicle we traded in on the Pilot, hence our complete satisfaction with getting 20-21 in a MUCH larger and MUCH more powerful vehicle.

d3coy · March 2005

somthing that i dont see here being considered, is that if you plan to do ANY regular hauling or carrying of stuff in the bed, you may want to consider a different truck, aside from an unprooven track record in the truck manufacturing market, Honda dosent really look at this as a work truck, just look at the height of the bed sils, they're higher than the new f-15o, thus much harder to put things in or get them out, also the area where teh bed meets the cab is not level making it odd, if not impossible to put a toolbox on, and lets face it, if you're not buying it for it utility AS a truck, you're buying it for vanity, poseurs should drive somthing else.

robr2 · March 2005

and lets face it, if you're not buying it for it utility AS a truck, you're buying it for vanity, poseurs should drive somthing else.

Oh that's rich. If it wasn't for "poseurs" and their "trucks", the market for pickups would be around 25% of what it is.

once_for_all · March 2005

we disagree I think on the major upgrades the Ridgeline has made.

Simply, it has introduced carlike ride, handling, and AWD into the truck market. It did this with the independent rear suspension.

None of the others can make that claim. The Taco, Frontier, Avalanche, Sport Trac, etc. all fall short. Very short.

Only the Baja has these similar features. Only the 2007 Sport Trac is on the horizon.

The Ridgleline has a MAJOR opportunity to capitalize on what it is. But, they are trying to play too much truck with the juiced up engine. Fuel economy (and lack thereof) is going to hurt sales.

BTW, the current generation Forester is rated at 30 mpg highway, 2 more than the '03 I have.

John

qbrozen · March 2005

Oh, I agree that nothing on the market right now is a direct comparison ... but those are as close as you can get. The Baja may have similar goals, but the size just makes it an outlandish comparison.

I don't necessarily agree that fuel economy will hurt sales. Plenty of vehicles with worse mileage sell like hotcakes.

jay_24 · March 2005

Trade just for the milage?

Unless you can trade even-up you won't come out ahead until about 4 years. The Ridgeline will probably cost 3K more than your trade. (being optimisitc unless your Dodge is absolutely loaded)

18000miles @ 20mpg = 900 gallons of gas
@14.7mpg = 1225 gallons
diff of 325 gallons X $2.50 = $812 per year

The $812 per year sounds good, so it comes down to how much it the new Ridgline going to cost and how bad you want out of the Dodge.

In theory your breakeven is in about 3 to 4 years so maybe its worth it since your mpg is so bad.

I'm 6'5"ish and fit into a subie Outback. Then again define "fit". It all comes down to what your comfortable with. I love the 27+mpg and AWD. The Turbo models are around 250hp so power ain't an issue, but mpg drops a bit for those. Size for the Baja is.

Face it we all want safety, 50mpg, 250+hp, seats 5 adults, truck look, hauls everthing, costs next to nothing, and lasts forever.

once_for_all · March 2005

we are about to see a major financial hurt put on these gas hogs in the US.

It has already started with GM falling $1.50 below analysts expected return per share. Ford is next.

You won't be able to re-sell any of these vehicles for their normal value that they would have at gasoline prices below $2 per gallon. I don't begin to understand gasoline pricing, but I am willing to listen to people wiser than myself.

I expect in a couple years, there will be turbo-diesels in many more vehicles. Honda may even have one of GM's units in the Ridgeline.

John

atlgaxt · March 2005

You got it backward. The poseurs are the one's driving the big trucks who do not really need them. As I have said over and over, the Ridgeline offers all of the capability that most truck buyers need, without the drawbacks. All Honda needs to hit their sales goals is less than 1% of the combined pickup / SUV market.

And it terms of an unproven track record, it is a Honda. Enough said.

P.S. Edmunds offers a check spelling feature. You really ought to try it out.

xwesx · March 2005

Yep, sounds good. Sign me up for one of those, Jay! ;-D

nwdriver · March 2005

It appears the ridgeline has a 6,050lb. gross vehicle weight--which qualifies it for the $25,000 first year write-off for those using it for business. That's really nice.

I wish Honda would post a 6,000lb. GVW for the Pilot.

PF_Flyer · March 2005

WOMEN AND TRUCKS. One of our journalists is writing an article about women and trucks: why they love their trucks, the decisions that they have to make when purchasing a truck versus a car, and whether or not theyve encountered discrimination or bias when buying or driving a truck. If youd like to share your story, please respond to jhelperin@edmunds by Sunday, March 26th. Thanks!

Honda Ridgeline SUT

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles