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
Bob
That should read:
All these systems are 2-speed units, with a high and a low range.
Bob
I have a trooper, and I actually go off-road several times a year. The torque on demand system is great, in the snow - forget about it. Though for deep stuff, particularly deep sand, I prefer the locking center differential over the viscous coupling, I use 4-low most of the time when on the beach. Both work, but the locking differential doesn't slip or have a computer switching traction around when it gets deep. Kind of the best of both worlds, full-time and part-time.
AWD in almost ALL cases are front wheel drive derived vehicles that can (in some way/shape/form) also transfer power to the rear end of the vehicle. Some of these systems are better than others. Audi has the best system and is similar to subaru where power is sent to all wheels at all times in varying degrees. Others, like the honda CR-v and others are FWD unless the front wheels slip in which case an amout of power can be sent to the rear. The difference between AWD and 4WD is that AWD can be driven on dry pavement (because of the center differential) and 4WD can't because of the direct connection. There ARE now combo versions (like the QX4 and explorer that allows 4WD AND AWD.
Not necessarily true. It means all 4 wheels are receiving power, but they're not necessarily locked. In part-time 4WD they are locked—and they're only "really" locked if you have "locking differentials," that you have manually locked.
In full-time 4WD there is an open center differential that allows for the front tires to turn at different speeds while turning, so they are definitely NOT locked.
As to to most AWD systems being derived from FWD, again, not true. The AWD used on the Olds Bravada, GMC Denali, Cadillac Escalade, Mercury Mountaineer, and Porsche 911 are not FWD-derived. I'm sure there are others too.
If you mean to say that the most popular AWDs are FWD-derived, then I would agree with you.
Bob
Those being the first on the block to get one, likely aren't going to get any good deals...
Bob
What does that make the Pilot? A minivan/SUV hybrid? A repackaged station wagon?
Pilot would be classified as a Light Truck/Wagon by EPA. Just like Suburban, Durango, Liberty, Explorer, X5, RX300, Caravan, Odyssey, CRV, Tahoe...
rsholland
FYI, VTM-4 also happens to be a Borg-Warner System.
I would never have thought that!!!
Bob
Bob
And wouldn't 75 units be a fair amount for a half-year at one dealer? That seems like a lot to me, even for a larger dealer. Maybe not.
I guess we'll see in the summer, but I think with the "internal" competition within Honda, such as the larger, more powerful CR-V, and an Odyssey that will now be in greater supply, any ADM that shows up on the Pilot will not last long.
The bottom line is: don't be surprised to see ADMs on these new Pilots—and for some time to come. It's a sellers market, and the dealers know it.
Bob
Minivans and SUVs do not.
I've posted this link before, but I think it's relevant to the current discussion on types of AWD/4WD systems as it does a good job of describing the system on the Pilot.
http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=popmech_auto.story&STORY=/www/story/01-17-2002/0001650158&EDATE=THU+Jan+17+2002,+10
Bob
correction also, the trooper has an electromagnetic clutch that controls the torque on demand system, not a viscous coupling, I was thinking about this on the way home.
Wow, a lot of posts generated from a new vehicle!
What gives???
Steve
Host
SUVs, Vans and Aftermarket & Accessories Message Boards
http://stacks.msnbc.com/news/673714.asp
http://www.autofieldguide.com/columns/jeff/1000oc.html
Honda COO Tom Elliott, speaking after the Pilot's unveiling, said the vehicle will be priced between $25,000 and $30,000.
the link is too long to post, but you can find it here.
I think I'll wait until I see the official Honda prices.
Apparently not both.
Anyone?
I didn't piece your question and article together. You should read more about the VTM system. It is Acura's way of delivering power to the rear wheels in a front wheel drive vehicle. It seems very effective, and with the locking rear very functional. However, if we go back to the whole off-road and consumers need thing, a traditional setup, with a transfer case in the middle of the transmission, solid axles, RWD based vehicles are probably more bullet proof when it comes down to it.
sounds great, take a look, if out in june then expect more car mag articles.
The Highlander doesn't have third row seats. May offer them when the RX300 is redesigned because they're adding a third row. Also, the Highlander is ugly, while the Pilot is only plain.
A couple questions:
It says it can take a 48" piece of plywood. Think that is that also the 96" length?
Where do you suppose the spare is hiding? Underneath is not good for trail clearance, but inside takes from cargo room. The old 1970's station wagons had room inside for a full size spare AND a stack of plywood sheets. The spare was either in a well, or to the side, behind the wheeel well with a corresponding luggage space on the other side.
I wonder what size tires it will have or be able to take. 31X10.5 seems like the starting point for any off-road adventures (clearance). The engine (240HP?) seems like it should handle some decent size tires.
"First Look" article just rehashes the same things all ready discussed in this forum. However, MSRP estimates are a bit higher than has been batted around; As mentioned in an earlier post, per Motor Trend price estimates are to range from $28,000-36,000. That would put the high end Pilot EX version w/leather in the same price range as the lower level MDX.....Hmmm. A bit disappointed, I was hoping it would come in a few thousand dollars lower.
The Pilot loses, in my book, on looks alone. This is Japanese conservatism of styling taken way too far.
It looks like a CRV clone with extra cladding and a third row. BORING.
No thanks; I'll take a Terracan if it ever comes over.
As for styling, sure the styling is plain. That’s probably an effort to provide more interior space in relation to exterior size, which is a practical approach. It may even be dated. However, the technology is not.
Here’s the specs., taken from a Honda press release. They're anything but boring:
Advanced 3.5-liter, 24-valve, all-aluminum VTEC V-6 240 hp. engine
Five-speed electronically controlled transmission
VTM-4 (Variable Torque Management 4WD) full-time, four-wheel drive system.
Best-in-class interior space with theatre-style seating for up to eight passengers
Widest wheel track in its class
60/40 split folding second- and third-row seats that convert to accommodate up to eight passengers and a wide variety of cargo items.
Flat cargo floor, giving the Pilot the largest and most versatile passenger and cargo carrying capability in its class.
Five-star safety performance.
Add Honda’s reliability, and you won’t find any competition at $25,000.
To criticize styling because you would have liked better, is understandable. But, to entirely dismiss this vehicle on styling alone is to miss the big picture. The MDX excels in performance, versatility, reliability, and safety. And this is an MDX with an eighth seat as a bonus, for a $10,000 discount.
If you want to spend more for styling, or accept less reliability or performance just to get pretty styling, go right ahead. Meanwhile, there’ll be a long waiting list of buyers with different priorities.
It looks like someone took a CRV and put it in the photocopier at 140%.
Not surprised. Much like Trail Blazer versus Suburban, or Explorer versus Expedition.
Where do you suppose the spare is hiding? Underneath is not good for trail clearance, but inside takes from cargo room.
I'm guessing it would be similar to MDX, and will likely have similar minimum ground clearance (8.1 inch) as well.
I wonder what size tires it will have or be able to take. 31X10.5 seems like the starting point for any off-road adventures (clearance). The engine (240HP?) seems like it should handle some decent size tires.
I believe the drivetrain will be the same as that in Odyssey (hence, 240 HP, 5-speed automatic) but as far as tires go, since this vehicle is not meant to be a serious off roader, it will likely wear 235 rubber (same as MDX) on 16 inch rims (as in base MDX). The tire selection would be for road use as well.
spartanman2
Motor Trend price estimates are to range from $28,000-36,000. That would put the high end Pilot EX version w/leather in the same price range as the lower level MDX.....Hmmm. A bit disappointed, I was hoping it would come in a few thousand dollars lower.
Unless Honda is offering only AWD models, I will be surprised to see the base price any higher than $26K for 2WD base to $32K with leather, NAV (or RES) AWD model. That would leave $3K difference on the lower side (CRV EX) and same on the higher side (base MDX), and compete directly with Toyota Highlander, Buick Rendezvous, Ford Explorer etc. Motor Trend estimates is not official anyway.
Now THAT'S boring! The Pilot has this baby beat on styling by a long margin. It looks like the reincarnation of the original Isuzu Trooper.
At least MB has dropped the price. At $73K, the G-Class is much more affordable than the G-wagen it is obviously styled after.