By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our
Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our
Visitor Agreement.
Comments
Even better, why not a retracting back window like the old station wagons and the 4Runner????
I agree about the Ford, though. There are some subtle styling elements that give it character. To my eyes, the circular wheel arches are a nice touch and don't look overdone. Keeping the same bsic shape is smarter than most people give them credit for. It looks like an SUV. It could be the icon for SUVs. You look at it, and it looks exactly like what you expected.
240 hp and great handling
advanced four wheel drive system
Honda reliability
safety features
seating for 8
All for a base price of around $25,000
I'd say that makes it unique in an SUV market crowded with inferior, or much more expensive competitors.
Chrysler needs styling to sell its shoddy products, Honda doesn't. I think it's that simple. Remember the Odyssey was called a swiss army knife on wheels. 3 years after its intro. and there's still a waiting list. I think the same success awaits the Pilot.
Honda did offer it to the American dealers, but, since Passport sales were strong at the time, the US dealers turned it down. It was a group of New Zealand journalists who, after test driving it on the track, told Honda that they would love it. Honda began exporting it there and the CR-V became an overnight success. When the RAV4 began selling like hotcakes here in the US, the Americans finally woke up and decided that they would like to get it as well.
OK
"advanced four wheel drive system"
But does it have 4 low? Most Hondas don't.
"Honda reliability"
Yes!
"safety features"
Who cares? (semi kidding, as long as it has seat belts and air bag)
"seating for 8"
What is this, a bus? I'd rather have towing capacity and 4wd low, plus room for firewood and 3 dogs.
"All for a base price of around $25,000"
OK, but Liberty has 4 low and less room, but all the other features.
I think Honda needs to build a real truck, then make it into an SUV. Heck, they finally built a RWD sports car, they should be able to do a truck. Look at the T-100/Tundra.
As for low gear, the MDX and I assume the Pilot has a low gear. It can be used at speeds below 18mph, but mainly to get unstuck in snow or mud, not towing.
No complaints about styling?
But none of them with Honda's quality.
"As for low gear, the MDX and I assume the Pilot has a low gear. It can be used at speeds below 18mph, but mainly to get unstuck in snow or mud, not towing."
I don't know. Can they go offroad? (I don't mean dirt roads, I mean rocks, logs, mud, and stuff. Rubicon would be a good test.)
No complaints about styling?
Not really.
That is why they kept a solid rear in the Liberty?
I don't think that is what Jeep wanted, it is what the (potential) buyers demanded.
BTW, check out the Dakar Rally on Speedvision. I was watching it last night. The SWB Pajaro (Montero) absolutely dominates this race.
I'm convinced that IRS can be made into a good off-roader. As to rock-crawling, that's where solid axles have the edge.
Bob
The Escape, which has four wheel independent suspension and a car-like ride, is now the #1 selling small SUV (surpassing the CRV), not the Liberty.
I don't even think increased sales of the Liberty have offset declines in the JGC.
Bob
So I guess, Explorer owners get a second look. But I will try to look for the character line near tail lamp you mentioned the next time I see the new Explorer.
As for Forester, IMO its purpose made it look awkward, even though it does carry some interesting character lines, especially around fenders.
Unfortunately, Styling is what gets people into the showroom.
Sure it can, but do you think that would be it?
but in an age where there are SO MANY SUVs/crossovers/minivans, you have to do SOMETHING to stand out.
As in Aztec? Not sure if standing out did it any good. If there is an SUV that stands out from the rest, it is Montero, others looks all the same.
anonymous02
But does it have 4 low? Most Hondas don't.
No. It would still have a five speed automatic, without a low gear. That's the audience it is going to target, who don't go rock crawling, or tow anything more than a 4500 lb. boat, but feel the need for a vehicle that can carry 7-8 people, without being intimidated by other SUV/truck drivers.
I think Honda needs to build a real truck, then make it into an SUV. Heck, they finally built a RWD sports car, they should be able to do a truck.
Hehe, just so that you know, Honda's first car was a RWD sports car. As for a new truck platform, I doubt it will happen, and Honda has already mentioned that they do not plan to produce a pickup truck atleast until 2005. And then, does JGC suffer from its unit body construction?
That is why they kept a solid rear in the Liberty?
So why do you think Ford now uses IRS in Explorer? As for Liberty, does it still have a leaf suspension to enhance its load carrying abilities?
If all trucks were to be designed with the same purpose in mind, they all would be too similar.
What are the advantages or trade offs between the solid rear axle and IRS?
Not sure that I see why the solid is necessarily better for off roading, but that seems to be accepted.
It looks like Princess Di's hearse!
"If there is an SUV that stands out from the rest, it is Montero, others looks all the same."
True. I think they look rather smallish, but I like the styling. Put that in a photocopier and do a 1 1/4 enlargement.
"No. It would still have a five speed automatic, without a low gear. That's the audience it is going to target, who don't go rock crawling, or tow anything more than a 4500 lb. boat, but feel the need for a vehicle that can carry 7-8 people, without being intimidated by other SUV/truck drivers."
So, those who are buying Excursions, Expeditions, Tahoes, etc. for these qualities will continue to do so. That gives Honda a smaller chunk of the market pie.
"Hehe, just so that you know, Honda's first car was a RWD sports car."
I think I knew that at one time. I was referring to present day cars in the US.
"And then, does JGC suffer from its unit body construction?"
Some might argue yes. Personally, I don't know.
"So why do you think Ford now uses IRS in Explorer?"
They caved?
"As for Liberty, does it still have a leaf suspension to enhance its load carrying abilities?"
I don't think so. I never mentioned leafs being necessary, or were you just asking in general?
"If all trucks were to be designed with the same purpose in mind, they all would be too similar."
But they kind of are...
Besides much better on-road handling, the Explorer—and now the Expedition and Navigator too, gained huge amounts of interior space, a much lower floor height, and the fold flat third seat; all gains resulting from converting to IRS.
No, the Liberty has coils in the rear, not leaf.
Bob
Yes. Perhaps that would be it for now.
They caved?
I would like to think so.
But they kind of are...
I don't think so. I can't imagine anybody cross-shopping Expedition and Wrangler.
We sit here dabling with style, what ifs and the like, it's because we don't have enough new stuff of the actual vehicle to sink our teeth into....still Stage 1 or II
solid axles generally have more articulation, better for rock climbing, I.S. generally provide more ground clearence, HUMMER, than solids.
Went to the Honda site and saw no new information. Please clarify.
Regards
http://www.hondacars.com/pilot/index.html.
It's just a email sign up for WHEN more info. becomes available.
Thanks
Lets see, the Highlander (AWD Camry Wagon), the RX300 (expensive AWD Camry Wagon), the MDX (expensive AWD Odyssey) and now the Pilot (AWD Odyssey). I can't understand why people are so suckered in by these continuous re-skins.
None of these vehicles would last 5 minutes on real 4WD terrain. AWD means no low range, means leave it at the road's end and jump in your friend's Jeep or Isuzu. On that note for anyone interested in a real on street, off road hot rod the Axiom is pretty sweet. It's the only new hybrid tested by FourWheeler and Off Road magazines, and they both loved it. Of course Motor Trend hated it but they test cars or wagons or minivans....
Because these vehicles perform the tasks their owner want or need better than traditional SUVs do. You better get used to this trend, because that's clearly the way the market is moving. Otherwise, you may end up with an ulcer...
Bob
Dear Matherson,
Nothing to forgive -- knowing what you want and why you want it is cool (see below).
537
Dear RsHolland.
Thanks for putting me in quotes. Did I see the word "trend"?
The point of my message is to bring these ivory tower vehicles down to their base reality -- nothing fancy here; remember that when you're forking out $30,000+ or more for them.
I'm just here to be a foil.
As to being a foil, you're not saying anything most people here haven't already heard before. People who buy this new-breed of SUV really aren't interested heavy-duty off-roading. So whether it costs $30K or $40K, it doesn't matter. They're getting the vehicle that best suits their needs.
Bob
I know there are a lot of Honda guys who like the Pilot and I'm sure it will be a reliable rig. I just don't see spending big money on a dull looking vehicle with limited off road ability.
Dan, the Bravada is no more off-road worthy than the Pilot. Like the Pilot (and unlike the TrailBlazer and Envoy), it too doesn't have a low range.
Bob
how many yukons, jeeps, wranglers, go off road-<5%
AWD--traction is where it's at, suburu, audi have been teaching us a new religion. wet dry, etc, traction matters and it matters a lot.
people want room, people want traction, features smart design, ease of use for a family the market wants it all. if they put (new trend !!!) sliding doors on the yukon, explorer, jeep they'd sell more. women want safe for their families, room sells, features sell, successful products have successful design and features. maybe we should start asking which manufacturers are sweating right now hmmmmmm ml320, jeep, acura, caravan, many tears and many nightmares are a coming "why didn't we think of that" you'll see.
Doom and gloom sayers--like iaccoca (?sp) says
lead...follow.... or get out of the way. YOu doomers won't change the trend, and people use their vehicles the way THEY WANT...not the way you wish. move to a more sympathetic board.
the ody isn't this or that..it is a huge success
the mdx isn't this or that..it's a huge success
the pilot isn't this, that, or have low range...boo hoo.. it will have ........what it takes...a lot of what it takes....HUGE SUCCESS.
those gloomers why don't you put your money where your mouth has been, spend a fortune on a car and put it out there just as you suggest and let the market remind you of your "forsight" "style", and that "suv low gear" any takers...i didn't think so. design a car and be able to sell all at msrp+ 3 years in a row...that's an automakers nirvana. people don't go off road, most don't see a soft shoulder, move to the suv boards and tell them "USE YOUR LOW RANGE OR ELSE". they won't listen, and who would blame them. Tell that to the hummer drivers gee whiz guys/gals get with the program (er market)....what...ever!!!!!
As opposed to forking over $30,000+ for an Expedition, Excursion,Suburban or Land Cruiser - real SUVs with 4WD that will never be taken off road by the majority of buyers.
Try http://www.hondanews.com
sowr
I can't understand why people are so suckered in by these continuous re-skins.
Don't bother. The idea is similar to bolting seats on pickup truck bed followed by a re-skin. Some will take them, others prefer 'corporate SUV' (whatever that means). A variety of flavours can't be a bad thing.
Bob
Bob
There are a number of different vehicles out there that serve difference purposes. To begin with, we had, quite simply, automobiles and trucks. That simple. If you were a car buyer and you needed more 'cargo room' you bought the station wagon version. Pure and simple. 1984 was a landmark year in Automobile history however and will go down as the year that changed everything. Why? AMC introduced the Jeep Cherokee and Chrysler the Voyager/Caravan. The Jeep was the first real SUV that wasn't the size of a tank and the voyager killed the stationwagon.... the ride of a car, the cargo room and sliding doors of a van. They both changed the world. Fast forward the late 1990's.
People began buying SUVs (4WD) by the millions... they were tough looking, high off the groung and could be driven just about anywhere and with gas fairly inexpensive, fuel economy didn't matter. Also by the late 90's, carmakers learned that over 90% of people buying SUV's NEVER took their vehicles off road and over 75% never even used the 4WD in anything other than virtual blizzards.
Fast-forward to today: If you need to carry people and cargo you have (for the most part) 2 options: SUV or Minivan. Small 'cute utes' don't fit the bill because they have NO cargo capacity and hold 5 TOPS so they don't count as an option. This is where vehicles like the RX300, MD-X, BMW X5, M-Class, Highlander, Aztek, Forester and now the Pilot come into play. These are vehicles that are unibody, drive like cars (built off car or minivan chasis), have ok gas milage, a lower center of gravity than SUV's.... in other words, they have most of the attributes of minivans, but LOOK like a more traditional SUV (hence, less "soccer mom" stigma and more "rough and tough" look). That's the point of these vehicles.. these hybrids.
To pick on the Pilot and others because they are not 'off road vehcles' is a waste of time because that is not what they're for. These cars are aimed squarely at 2 groups of people: First, the person who would normally buy a minivan but wants something more 'truck/SUV' looking and Second, somebody who THINKS they wanted an SUV but realized they would NEVER go off road and don't need a truck.
Therefore, it is important for folks to stop comparing explorers, jeeps and bravadas to the Honda Pilot and other like-vehicles. They are not competitors. The Honda Pilot's competitiion is ANY minivan (including Honda's own), the Highlander and the Chrysler Pacifica. If you need real off-road, you need a truck. It's that simple. While the Explorer and the Trailblazer are great vehicles, they are still trucks. They drive like trucks NOT cars/minivans. If you need to go off road, forget the Pilot/Highlander. If you want a minivan alternative and don't care about losing the sliding doors, go for the Pilot/Highlander.
I agree with the idea that the Pilot should not be cross shopped with the Explorer, Bravada, etc... But just because it doesn't make sense doesn't mean that it won't happen. Many people will look at the Explorer and say, "It's an SUV. It has lots of seats." Then they'll look at the Pilot and see the same thing. Ask them if they want a unit-body or a ladder on frame design and they'll say, "Does it come in blue?"
I don't think so. I can't imagine anybody cross-shopping Expedition and Wrangler."
I did exactly that. I also looked at Cherokee and Ranger, and Blazer.