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
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S
Leon
I thought I read that on the EX models, the price increase includes a moonroof. But going forward you are new forced into a spending an extra grand (esp. for the EX models).
At 32-35k, it may force a lot of people to look else where, as they are hitting Luxo pricing and Honda does not discount much.
--First, curtain airbags should be available. Honda could make the Pilot safer by including them.
--Second, the second and third rows should tumble forward like Toyota SUVs; the Pilot second row only slides forward and backward. Access to the third row Pilot seats is extremely difficult. I was incredulous when the Honda salesman suggested I try getting there through the door on the TRAFFIC side!!! The third row is a trap. If it is difficult to get into, it is also difficult to get out of. The Pilot at 188 inches long is a full 12 inches shorter than most minivans. It is the third row that takes the full brunt of this shortening.
--Third, rear sonar sensors should be standard. To my mind, this is better and more economical than a rear camera connected to the NAV system. Internet sources indicate that the parts of rear sonar sensors cost only about $50 or less.
--Fourth, the seat belt of middle seat on the second row should be attached the seat (like in Toyota SUVs) instead of on the roof in the Pilot. If you put a young child in this middle position in the Pilot and hook the belt so that the belt crosses the chest rather than at the neck, the belt does not retract after a child leans forward and leans back. This is dangerous.
--Fifth, the second and third rows should be contoured to be more ergonomic. These rows have straight back benches that seemed okay for short drives but could prove tiring for long ones.
The Pilot is advertised as an 8-passenger car. Well, it has 8 seatbelts and 8 headrests. Whether you can fit 8 people comfortably really depends on the size of the people occupying the second and third rows. I put 3 children 8 and under in the second row and they looked tight together, with little elbow room.
Maybe, I'll wait for the 2006 models. Isn't a major redesign scheduled for that year?
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S
Hopefully it won't kill the head-room.
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S
I will re-check the Pilot seats out more carefully. My previous impression was that the Pilot was much roomier than the XC90 and Lexus GX470, both in width of the second row and ease of getting in and out of the third row. Maybe I was wrong, at least with respect to the latter item. The Toyota Sequoia would solve any size deficiencies, but at the expense of driving the Love Boat.
It would have been nice if the price had not jumped so much.
anyway, i still think the Pilot is a good deal compared to what else is out there. of course, its all pretty subjective.
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S
The price increase of $1,250 equates to slightly less than 4% on the EXL-Nav. Not a bad deal given the new features. But I personally would have an easier time "dropping" to a Pilot if I thought they weren't skimping on safety. The Volvo XC90 V8 is now the vehicle I am interested in waiting on. Especially since it's after tax cost to me is LESS than the Pilot, while it's performance is on par with the BMW X5 4.4 and Porsche Cayenne S. The Pilot is the no brainer winner on low cost maintenance, but as best I can tell, the XC90 has worked most of the bugs out and the new V8 is made by Yamaha.
You can get into a XC90 for less than a Pilot? How does it handle compared to the Pilot? I only see a 5-cyl. listed here at Edmunds, so when is a V8 coming out? Surely that will push the price into the upper 30's.
I'm always looking for the best tool for the job.
I was considering the Pilot as a lower cost, high value alternative, but the wife ruled it out due to uncomfortable seats. She tends to ride in the back with our little one. I didn't notice that, but she did after only being in it for a few minutes. I see other here have mentioned that too.
And what's the deal with the side airbags? I don't get how they can figure out how to do it on MDX and CR-V, but not on the Pilot.
I think Honda has a lot of people scratching their heads on that one. Having side airbags would some, one more reason to consider a Pilot.
As far as handling goes, the XC90 is definitely a more European feeling, tighter handling and steering vehicle than the Pilot or MDX. It's not a Porsche Cayenne, but it's pretty darn good. The Pilot is "acceptable" in my opinion
(as is the GX470), but not much more.
"How can you sleep at night" taking the section 179 deduction for an SUV weighing over 6,000 lbs?
I guess I can sleep pretty well for getting a deduction on a currently allowable business expense that amounts to about $16,000 in savings. Especially when the Democrat's esteemed VP candidate John Edwards can apparantly sleep well at night charging 35% contingent legal fees on ridiculously inflated health care liability lawsuits. You didn't think he made his $100+/- million on a Senator's salary, did you?
I agree that the deductability of SUV's for business use probably has a few abusers. But if you really want to lose some sleep at night yourself, ask your family doctor or specialist - one that might be tasked with saving the life of one of your kids someday - what he or she sees for the future of health care costs in this country, thanks to abusers dressed up as trial lawyers. Or politicians.
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S
I'm with you on the ridiculous liability lawsuits. My wife got out of the health care field for just that reason.
Sorry for the detour, back to Pilot talk.
Honda's safety for everyone campaign states that by the end of 2006, all their vehicles will have side curtains, side airbags with occupant detection, anti-lock brakes, and vehicle stability assist.
Honda's logic is simple, as long as it sells and makes a huge profit for them, why bother to add curtain airbags?
As customer, I have no complaint because Honda's existence is to make money not to make us safer. It is our own responsibility to make us safer. Certainly I will be one of those who stay away from Pilot, at least for now.
not sure why the curtains are a make or break proposition especially if you're considering an 05 that now has stability control.
That said, I don't completely disagree with you regarding the side curtains being a make or break issue. As a matter of principal, I would rather have seen Honda put side curtain airbags in the Pilot for 2005, rather than take out a full 2-page add in the Washingotn Post earlier this week bragging about all the safety features they will be introducing in coming years. Actions speak louder than words. However, given the choice, I'd take stability control (if it really is a good system) over side curtain airbags.
The problem I have is that stating a car has "stability control" is like stating that it has "an engine". Doesn't tell you much on how good the systme actually is and controlling the vehicle in an emergency situation. And, in the case of the Pilot/MDX, the Pilot without stability control achieved higher emergency lane change scores than the MDX with it. I saw one review (Road and Track, I think), which basically analyzed Honda/Acura's stability control system as very weak in technology and actual real world benefits, compared to Mercedes, BMW or, for that matter, Volvo's. Only a couple of domestic manufacturers were rated lower. Furthermore, there have been several posts in the MDX forum where owners compained that the system failed them in a real world experience.
as far as trusting them because they are new: they have to be trained just like anyone else, so i would hope they know what they are doing (in any case, what you are asking for isn't exactly complex).
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S
They are not all created equal. The more advanced systems seem to be on the European vehicles, and some Japanese-model vehicles seem to have older versions that are not as effective.
There is scant documentation available. One common observation is that on Toyota's VSC and on (some?) Honda/Acura VSA, the system cuts off under braking, whereas the Bosch/Continental-Teves systems in MB's, Audi's, VW's, BMW's, etc. can run stability control even while braking.
At some BMW driving events, there had been discussion about the relative ineffectiveness of the previous-generation Acura TL's stability control system. Consumer Reports also noted that the addition of VSA to the MDX didn't help its emergency handling much.
There was previous debate and speculation that the systems were not "full-range" in features, but without enough documentation.
Lo and behold, when the new TL was introduced, Acura revealed that the new model has a true four-wheel VSA system (meaning the old one did not). The 2005 MDX introduces an"enhanced" VSA (meaning the old one has a "lesser" VSA).
NHTSA has noted in some of its studies that the effectiveness of specific stability control implementations does seem to vary between vehicles. Unfortunately there's no standard disclosure about them from the manufacturers, so we're left to our own devices.
The question then is, does the 2005 Honda Pilot get the "old" VSA from the MDX, or the "new" VSA like the 2005 MDX?
Here is what Honda has to say about the MDX's enhanced VSA:
A Vehicle Stability Assist (VSA) system (which for 2005 has been enhanced with active yaw control) to integrate traction control, the VTM-4 system, Anti-lock braking, throttle control and stability control
I have trouble reading the above, because I thought that ALL stability control systems incorporate yaw sensors to go with feedback from other systems. Does that mean that the previous VSA didn't have a yaw sensor at all (which would be awful and hardly worth calling stability control), or does it just mean that Acura has enhanced the yaw sensor somehow?
http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/ncap/RollRatings.cfm
i agree that it drove nicely but shouldn't it for an extra $12,000-$15,000? in considering both vehicles, my personal thought was that I'm on a budget,hauling kids and am expecting the attendant dirt, grim and spill. there was just too little added value to the volvo. (the MDX was a closer call)
that said, i really appreciate the education on stability control systems. i knew the bosch system used in bimmers and benzes was top-rate but had no idea that the toyota/honda systems were distinctively different. the better question may be whether a lower center of gravity is better than a top rate stabiity control system.
Personally, in driving the Honda Pilot, I think it is pretty good. Certainly compared to our Isuzu Trooper. But if you asked me what vehicle I'd rather be driving if I had to make an emergecy avoidance maneuver with, I'd take the XC90 in a heartbeat. Not that I'd drive either like a sports car, but it's the other guy you need to worry about. Obviously, safety factors are imporatant but not the only decision factor. If we made all of our purchase decisions based upon fear, or we would never leave our houses in any vehicle.
I agree with leoniv's comment that side curtain airbags have significant value in any side impact crash.
its just that the rest of the door is attached to it.
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S
besides exposing 3rd row folks, what's the safety difference between curtain and side air bags?
I had no idea there was such a difference in stability control between car manufacturers. I would still like to have stability control in my next car. It's better than nothing, but according to the above comments, it may be right next to nothing
But why NOT the Pilot? Why is VSA only on the EX-L? Not even on the EX? Is this "FOR EVERYONE"?
And why the heck no side-curtain airbags? ....
YES - I know that Honda promised "Safety for everyone" by the "END OF 2006". But that's a long time and a lot of side impacts with a lot of heads bouncing against glass windows in the best of cases and pickup truck bumpers in the worst ...
My suspicion was that this was done to protect MDX sales and associated profits. The Pilot sells just fine without 'em, so why bother! ....
Just my opinion of course - but like many other posters, after a BAD T-bone accident, I will NEVER buy another vehicle without side curtains ...
(and I REALLY wanted that Pilot .......)