Remember that the Pilot that was recently shown was a prototype, and my not reflect the final production model. They may have some last-minute changes (like a flip-up back window) once the production model rolls in.
The Forester was never called generic. It was called ugly. They poked fun of the over-sized grill, the awkward greenhouse, and all the plastic.
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.
They'll attract people that do a little research (smart people like all of us?) and find out what it has to offer: 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.
Lst night on Motorweek I saw video of the Pilot from the NAIAS. Is it me or does the back half of the Pilot appear to be disproportinal to the front half?
For stating what I have been saying since I saw the Pilot in Detroit. Late 80's early 90's styling does not cut it anymore. I think the Pilot will be a success despite it's styling, however. I also agree with varmit that the Explorer- no styling tour de force itself- is far more interesting than the Pilot. By the way, does anyone remember that the original CRV (which the Pilot VERY CLOSELY resembles) was never intended to be sold in the US. The styling was designed to appeal to an Asian buying public only. The only reason it appeared on our shores is that the US dealer body pressured Honda to bring it here because of the lack of any SUV product to sell at a time when SUV's were taking off in this country.To design a new Honda SUV in 2002 based on weirdo Asian styling from 5 or 6 years ago is beyond my comprehension.
Everyone talks about the "prototype" being shown at the auto show. I can't imagine that they would add a flip up rear window (however desireable) at this point. I imagine that what you see is what you get. I agree that stylistically the Pilot lacks. I have a deposit on one for the other reasons. Seats 8, drives well (hopefully), resale, and reliability.
Shellymeister - Where did you read that? That is the exact opposite of everything that I've read. Honda has stated that the styling of the CR-V was designed with the Explorer in mind.
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.
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.
But, there's plenty of old line real trucks out there. Meanwhile, growth is with suv's with four wheel independent suspension and a car like ride.
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.
Mark - Nope, that's not a low gear. You're correct about the ability to lock VTM4 into a full-time "on" mode, but that's different than having a dual transfer case.
"But, there's plenty of old line real trucks out there. Meanwhile, growth is with suv's with four wheel independent suspension and a car like ride."
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.)
What about all those Expeditions, Tahoes, Excursions, Navigators, etc????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
The Escape beat the CR-V in sales overall for 2001, given that it was a new model, and that the 1st gen CR-V was in the last year of production. The CR-V sales are higher than the Escape since the new CR-V was released.
Your right, in the top 10 they were all Mitsubishi Pajaros. There were other brands there however. I did see some Montero Sports, a Mercedes ML, and a few other brands, of which I don't remember.
jmatero 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.
"As for Forester, IMO its purpose made it look awkward,"
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."
The all-new Range Rover has a fully independent suspension, and is still very much an off-roader. The new '03 Expedition and Navigator also have IRS.
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.
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. 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.
the market pie keeps changing, what happens is that peoples tastes and needs change, people tend to buy in 3-4 year cycles. all those minivan and recent 3-4 year old suv's will be in a market for another concept...the pilot is one of the few newer concentps--larger, 3rd row seats that fold flat. So yes the yukon, expedition may be looking for something not pilot. but that's not were the market is moving....the pilot will redifine the market, and give to families and women what they want, people will shift there buying to pilot type vehicles and away from others just like the original minivan did, it will take time but the other manufacturers will reposnd as many concepts have stated in this year auto shows. people will wait long for the pilot just like the mdx and the market will try to fill the void with there own variant, see what happened to ody, people want it can't get it, settle for the new chrysler or sienna and wait. but if production is good, then the pie changes, more toward this type and away from "old" concepts. manufacturers are trying to read the trends and have product to buy aka escape, crv, mdx, protoge wagon, audi, etc. how many are buying body on frame like the bronco, blazer, tastes shift and the prize goes to the manufacturer that can read it and get the right product in enough numbers to the customer...sucessful products have many imitators, so if many copy the features that is the ultimate compliment. now the windstar and caravan, or any that have this heavy 3rd row (if they have a 3rd row) have to convince the public that's it's better or as good, until they can do the same. classic is when caravan got two sliding doors...windstar took a few years to get it right. they tried with a wider driver door, and tried to convince people that it was "dangerous" to let kids out that door (a salesperson at ford actually told me this) Hmmmmm next year they had that dangerous 2nd sliding door.
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
Ah, another corporate SUV, how refreshing, the AWD bandwagon must be riding on its bumpstops.
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....
Most of us are looking for a safe, dependable vehicle that can carry a family plus cargo. Add a little versatility with dissapearing seats for a trip to Home Depot or ski gear and the ability to get us through the snow.
<< I can't understand why people are so suckered in by these continuous re-skins. >>
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...
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.
No, you didn't use the word "trend," but the vehicles you listed, are from the latest breed of new SUVs, which to me, suggests that's what you were referring to.
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.
After finally seeing the Pilot I must say I'm pretty disappointed. Bland and uninspired styling to say the least. I love the MDX, but Honda really botched this truck up. My wife wanted an SUV in the summer (her Camry was getting old) and we decided on a 02 Bravada. Aside from 1 minor recall we have been problem free and driving in style. My wife was an import only gal, but I think the GM triplets have changed her mind a little. Definitely well worth taking a look.
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.
<< 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.
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!!!!!
"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."
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.
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.
No low range = minimal off road ability. Same is true for the Mercury Mountaineer. Anybody who does any serious off-roading will have vehicle with a two-speed transfer case. Yes, it's built on a truck frame, but it won't go places the TrailBlazer or Envoy will go, because it lacks the two-speed transfer case those two have.
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.
The Jeep wasn't the first SUV built smaller than a tank. It was very similar in size to the S10 Blazer and Bronco II. The trouble is everybody else started building theirs bigger and bigger after the Explorer came out.
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?"
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.