Two things that didn't jump out at me on the Pilot Specs that I assumed would be a given(possibly incorrectly) was that the EX-L would have heated seats and a six CD changer like the MDX (Touring version). Does anyone know if they are definitely in or out?
Also, I've done a quick comparison between the LX and EX on the Pilot site and this is what I've found that the EX has that the LX doesn't:
AM/FM/CD/Cassette Audio System with 7 Speakers w/subwoofer vs. a AM/FM/CD w/4 speakers Alloy Wheels Body Colored Moldings Rear Privacy Glass Auto off Headlights Remote Entry and Security System Synchronized Auto Climate Control Two extra cup holders (9 vs. 7 on LX) Upper Seatback pockets Cargo Net 8-Way Power Drivers seat. Roof Rails
Did I miss anything? I have an order in on an EX-L and am reasonably happy with the differences between the EX and LX though it's unclear to me how much more those differences will cost me. Now I need to figure out the differences between the EX-L and the MDX. The only things I can recall that are different from when I test drove the Base MDX is the 17 inch wheels, Moon Roof, and overall styling differences (subjective value on this). Can anyone else think of anything else that is a major difference.
Now that the PIlot site is up, it seems that the interior dimensions are IDENTICAL to the MDX. I thought that the Pilot was to be larger? How can 8 people fit into an MDX?
I'll be down in that area over the weekend - see if I can go by. I thought you might have seen them in Westboro - I think that is where Honda's distribution center is.
Although I haven't been checking around much, I'm suprised that they have them already. I haven't seen any at the Honda Giant or The Donkey Man in Norwood - maybe I'll swing by the Giant tonight.
I didn't play much with the radio (since the accessory power was off). So I'm not certain about this, but I believe it did not have a six disk changer. This was in the EX model.
FWIW, the 1st gen CR-V went without a factory moonroof (even with the SE trim) for four years. Honda just added it with the 2002 redesign. Yet, it still sold aggressively during those years. Honda will probably take the, "how many sales do we lose without it?" approach. If so, we won't see a moonroof until sales slow down.
Guy44 - All I can think to add is that "Body-Colored Moldings" includes the trailing edge of the roof line (where the CHMSL is mounted). On the LX model, this piece is matt black.
I know I've mentioned that before, but it's become a pet peeve of mine.
Robr2 - According to the GM at Silko, they are one of only two dealers in the nation who have them on the lot. Don't know why. Don't know if he was pulling my leg.
Are the cupholders covered? I doubt it but hope they are. The one thing I like about my 94 accord is that the cup holders in the center console have a lid that hides them when not in use.
Also, who in their right mind need 7 or 9 cup holders? I find this many to be really unneccessary.
On pilot.honda.com, does anyone know what the color is of the first pilot shown in the exterior photo gallery? It sort of looks like a metallic dark gray. I really like it and was curious. Thanks
You think that is bad? Back in the mid-late 90s I was at the NY Auto-show and they had a Pontiac Transport on the turn-table with a hand model there taking questions after a demo. During the demo they said it had 17 cup holders. So my buddy asked the question: If it only seats 8, why would you need 2+ cup holders per person! The display person was dumbfounded...
I'm assuming that is Sagebrush...which is scheduled to be available in August (first time Honda has used it). I had heard it was granite in coloring (which that one looks like). Interior color is Fern (a gray-green that can be found currently in some Odysseys)
No, they aren't covered. I tried to remove the ones between the front seats, but I wasn't able to. That makes it easie to clean them out. Maybe there's a way, but it wasn't obvious to me.
I've never understood the fascination with cupholders, either. It's probably because I'm not a coffee drinker.
As for having more cups than seats, I have to assume it's for convenience. The CR-V has three for the front two passengers. If a driver doesn't like the one in the dash, he/she can use the one between the seats or vice versa.
That's the only reason I can think of. Far too much attention is paid to those things.
In a family vehicle, I don't think you can have too many of them. Everyone's lives become much more pleasant when the kids have cupholders, and the Pilot is a family-type vehicle.
For myself, I wouldn't want to be without my cupholders. I drink alot of coffee, but not in the car. What I *do* drink in the car is water. Sometimes alot of it, particularly on longer drives. 3, 4, even 6 hour nonstop drives are nothing, so long as I have my water. Without a sipping drink, about 2 hours is the limit before things get ugly.
I understand that the Pilot will not be full time all wheel drive. However, I believe the MDX has the ability to lock in the AWD function. A recent post indicates that the Pilot may not have this capability? If this is true then Pilot's all wheel drive is really no different than stability or traction control with a rear locking differential. I have found that my current SUV with full time all wheel drive (40% front, 60% rear) has performed much better in snow conditions than its predecessor with standard auto 4-wheel/4-wheel hi/4-wheel low configurations. How do you feel Pilot's system perform in snow conditions?
Wolverine - The measurements of my "assistant" are not a matter for public record. But her twin sister is 5'6".
Ssminton - Yes, there is a locking feature like the MDX. My CR-V lacks such a device, so I spent a minute pushing the button on the dash and making "vroom" noises.
Please note that the locking feature in the MDX (and I assume the Pilot will be the same) allows for a temporary lock only at speeds below 18 mph. The feature is designed to get the vehicle moving in a really slippery situation. Following the 18 mph threshold (or shifting into 3rd gear or above), the vehicle reverts to front-wheel-drive, only locking in the rear if slip is noted or anticipated, say if you mash on the gas pedal.
In one of the pictures at INTERIOR Gallery, you can see the locking button (labelled VTM-4), just below the emergency button and on the right side of the stereo system (or optional navigation system).
MDX was chosen as Motor Trend 2000 SUV of the year, MT initially had suspected the VTM-4 probably would not perform as good as those full time 4-WD SUVs. But the outcome surprised them. MDX performed as good as those truck base full time 4-WD SUV. If Pilot uses the same VTM-4, I think they do, then it should drive very well on snow or dirt roads.
On the Pilot website, there is a very attractive red Pilot shown in the photo gallery. Does anyone know if this red is the actual production red? Varmint, I know you have seen the red in person. Do you think it is the same?
the moonroof is an important feature -- probably one that will cause me to skip out on the vehicle. i'm just used to having one there and can't see the reason for not having one there. But i am sure there will be plenty of people lining up for this vehicle. I thought the lack of rear AC for the Highlander would be an issue here in arizona and it certainly hasn't stopped people from buying them. I think we must have the highest sequoias and HL per capita in the nation -- and the pilot will probably join the ranks.
the moonroof is an important feature -- probably one that will cause me to skip out on the vehicle. i'm just used to having one there and can't see the reason for not having one there. But i am sure there will be plenty of people lining up for this vehicle. I thought the lack of rear AC for the Highlander would be an issue here in arizona and it certainly hasn't stopped people from buying them. I think we must have the highest sequoias and HL per capita in the nation -- and the pilot will probably join the ranks.
But i don't think from me. i've wanted the rear A/C and the option for 7 seats (neither of which is covered by the HL) but i need a moonroof for the evenings and winters here. so i guess i wait for the toyota runner and the volvo xc90...
You mentioned the 18mph speed sensor for keeping the Pilot locked in all-wheel-drive. If you keep the vehicle in 1st or 2nd gear but attain over 18mph, will vehicle stay in all-wheel drive? I had trouble going downhill in snow conditions with a previous SUV when in "auto 4WD" because the vehicle tended to come out of 4WD when coasting. Any thoughts?
Thanx Varmint, the only problem was they wouldn't allow me to sit in it (they claimed the person with the key wasn't around). I'm not too keen on the light metallic green color, but the other colors looked great. I really didn't pay attention to detail on each vehicle, because I was in a rush, I mainly wanted to see how my 6'7" frame would fit in it. The dealers didn't have much info on the Pilots except to say, the vehicles would only be around for a few more days because they were designated for autoshows (possibly in the Boston area soon, one dealer said visitors would be able to sit in and ride in the vehicles, hmmmm). I'm hoping to stop by again on Friday, maybe I'll have a chance to sit in one. If the Pilot doesn't come in the same color blue as the CRV, my choice will be between Black and White...........
The specs on the MDX state that either the up-shift to higher gear OR attaining over 18mph. So, either way, the auto-lock would disengage. It should be the same for the Pilot.
However, some of the current electronically controlled AWD vehicles use various sensors, including vehicle angle or "yaw" sensors for cornering. I would assume that going significantly up or downhill would cause the VTM system to direct some torque to the rear wheels proactively to enhance stability.
I was surprise to see that the MDX has more room behind the 2nd row of seats than the pilot. Also, the legroom is substantially less than the Explorer in the third seat.
Shaq2kobe - I talked with Silko again. They left me a message about making an appointment to see it. Apparently, they forgot to take me off their call list when I went down on Sunday.
Anyway, the rep told me that the vehicles are there waiting to be sent to other dealerships on this coast. They are to be showroom models. I was told they wwould be shipped out on Monday. He also told me that they are only allowing people to see them by appointment. I don't know why. Maybe so that they can keep them clean.
The Pilot will have the same AWD as the MDX. Why not just go to www.honda.com and check it out rather than listening to hearsay.
Cupholds are the best thing since sliced bread. I have a 2000 Maxima with 2 in the center console. I can put anything from coffee cups and cans to large water bottles (my drink of choice). They also hold my cell phone, change and all sorts odd items. IMHO any vehicle that doesn't have good cup holders will quickly drop down on my list of potential purchases.
Folks, AWD is not a truly a traction aid. Yes, there are some benefits in preventing a loss of traction, but that is not its primary purpose. A tire that is rolling without power has the same amount of traction as a tire that is getting torque.
AWD makes you go forward.
Or reverse, depending on what gear you're in. The bottom line is; it only works if you have your foot on the gas.
Why does the locking feature cut out at 18 mph? Presumably, you need AWD because some of the tires are slipping and preventing forward motion. You need to route power to another tire to keep moving. If you are driving at speeds higher than 18 mph, there are a few possibilities we should consider.
1.) It's not that slippery. VTM4 has to protect itself from binding. A sensible person would not be driving all that fast in slippery conditions. If it's not slippery, then you shouldn't have the AWD locked because the drivetrain can bind during turns.
2.) If it is that slippery, you're going too fast and no amount of power is going to save your hide. Even if power goes to all four wheels and the spare tire, these vehicles are heavy and, despite years of watching roadrunner cartoons, I've found that the laws of physics will not be ignored.
3.) You are no longer stuck and 2WD should be sufficient. At 18+ mph, a 4,000 lbs vehicle has adequate momentum. Which leads us back to concerns raised in possibility number 2.
As I understand it, VTM4 disengages gradually. Wmquan probably has a better understanding of this than I do. I don't recall the exact speeds, but a percentage of power is sent through the rear differential under ~6mph. That percentage drops when the speed reaches the next plateau and so on. By the time you hit 18 mph, the system is fully disengaged.
To the best of my knowledge VTM4 does not use a yaw sensor. That sort of thing is found in systems like MB's ESP or even Honda's VSA. Those are brake systems, not 4X4 or AWD. They're kind of the opposite of a AWD. I've never heard of a grade sensing system, except for Grade Logic transmissions and Rover's Hill Decent Control. VTM4 activates upon slippage and when there is significant throttle input. That's all.
I saw the pilot at the New York Auto show and was impressed. Its between the pilot and the toyota highlander for us, and I was wondering if anyone had an idea regarding pricing for the pilot. Also, about when are dealers expecting them . Thanks
I really liked the look of the white one (especially with tinted windows), and like I said, if there is no CRV blue, then my choice is between the black or white one, which the dealership had these back to back.
varmint: did they also mention the show in Boston or near Boston, where customers would be able to test drive them and sit in them? I just can't figure out how a dealership, with approx. 10 Pilots on the lot, could have dealers that know so little about the Pilots. I know Honda has a few new products this year, but when I asked to show me the LX and then the EX, none of the 4 or 5 daelers knew how to tell them apart. And they had no brochures on the Pilot........strange!!!
Is just like the MDX's. Let me try some thoughts on it, if you will. Unfortunately, www.hondabeat.com once had a really lengthy article on this but it is not on the server now.
--> What kind of AWD?
The definition of "4WD" and "AWD" varies and is often distorted by manufacturers -- there is no consistent terminology. According to the SUV thread here entitled "4WD & AWD Systems Explained," the MDX/Pilot system (called VTM-4) is "full-time AWD." That means that the system is always capable of going into AWD, but is not necessarily always powering all four wheels. Systems that are always driving all four wheels and with a center differential are usually called "permanent AWD."
An example of "permanent AWD" is the Torsen-differential based Audi quattro system (not the one that is based on Haldex and is also called quattro, however).
--> How does the MDX (and Pilot) AWD work?
The MDX is, most of the time, purely front-wheel drive only. Power is sent to the rear wheels under three circumstances, only one of which is under the driver's direct control:
1) When slippage is detected. This is a function of most AWD systems. I believe up to 50% of power can be sent to the rear, though I may be off a few percentage points. When power is sent to the rear, it can be apportioned between each rear wheel. However, VTM-4 cannot apportion power between the two front wheels.
2) When the vehicle is accelerating within certain parameters. This is similar to the system in a few Subarus (Subaru has a number of different AWD systems, including one that is permanent AWD, but others that are full-time AWD). The theory is that you're trying to launch the vehicle forward and it's better for all tires to push ahead.
3) When the "VTM-4 lock" is engaged by the driver. One confusing aspect is that some people consider this VTM-4 when VTM-4 is the overall system, and the "lock" is just a feature. In this case, up to half of the vehicle's power is sent to the rear, AND both of the rear wheels are locked so they do not spin independently. This only works in first or second gear, and it begins to reduce the percentage at speeds approaching 18mph, upon which the "lock" mode is automatically disengaged by the VTM-4 system. This mode is meant to get the driver out of a sticky situation, so he or she can get moving.
The power is distributed through a propeller shaft to the rear wheels, where two electronically-controlled clutch packs transfer power to the rear wheels. It is not a true rear differential as I understand it.
--> How well does VTM-4 work?
This has been the subject of a lot of debate, and a lot of the debate is academic as opposed to real-world (from people who haven't tried the MDX in snow). Academic opinions on VTM-4 on paper range from positive to scorn. Real-world opinions are generally quite positive. I've seen posts from MDX owners in Minnesota and other snowy parts, and they've been happy. Main complaints I've seen are what happens when a lot of snow/ice builds up between the wheel and the mudguard, and because of the lack of stability control (some sliding, especially when stopping on slippery ice/snow while going uphill, and starting again).
But a lot of snow/tire capability isn't just in the drive system. Tires obviously have a lot to do with it, along with the driver's abilities.
As previously discussed, the MDX/Pilot lacks stability control, which is useful for skidding conditions that can cause the rear to fishtail under slippery conditions. In such cases, the VTM-4 system can't help much if at all. Most notable is that if you're braking, very little torque is being delivered to the rear, so not much happens there.
Stability control systems have yaw sensors, along with input from the steering and braking systems, and try to brake selected wheels in varying degrees to balance out the skid. Even they have limits, since if there's near-zero traction, you're up the creek. Still, I think the MDX/Pilot should have it. It would help with the slight fishtailing tendency that Consumer Reports and Motor Week noted with the MDX, and that will probably be in the Pilot too.
Generally, VTM-4 is not as sophisticated as Honda/Acura marketing promotes it as. There is no transfer case, no low-range, which is useful for traditional SUV tasks like towing and some off-roading.
I think that it's a better-than-average full-time AWD system, mainly because it does have the proactive acceleration and manual lock modes. It won't handle every situation like permanent AWD or permanent 4WD would, but for me, those are very rare situations that I don't find myself in. That's not to say I won't ever get stuck, I can only say it hasn't happened yet. Most of my experience is with the mountain passes east of the Seattle area, where there's a lot of rainy, slushy, or simply snow/ice covered roads. So far the MDX has done fine, though we are careful.
Others point out that the vehicle can still get stuck if only one of the front wheels has traction, since the power can't be split between the two front wheels. However, this is what I meant about the discussion getting somewhat academic.
The major criticism of VTM-4 applies to most full-time AWD systems, especially the ones that deliver no power to the rear wheels under normal driving conditions (some full-time AWD systems deliver 10% to 20% of power to the rear under normal conditions). The system is reactive under normal cruising (not accelerating, or locking VTM-4). Slippage must be detected by ABS sensors first, then power transferred by engaging the clutch packs. There is a time delay, though I don't know precisely how long. This is typical of electronic systems, which take reading of mechanical conditions, and then decide how to apply mechanical controls. The Torsen-based quattro can react mechanically in a much quicker time frame.
I know that the system in the XC90 reacts within about 1/7th of a tire rotation. I don't know if VTM-4 is that fast. Critics of these transfer systems point out that such a delay may provide enough time for the vehicle to get into more trouble. Others say that under most slippery conditions, the reaction time is more than adequate.
One point that has come up is whether or not the VTM-4 system will be more prone to overheating and perhaps long-term durability issues. The clutch packs, not being true differentials, aren't designed to hold up to long, sustained torque transfer. E.g. I wouldn't drive with VTM-4 engaged for long periods, and, with its limitations on engagement, is precisely how Honda/Acura intends it.
Honda/Acura require that all towing be done with extra transmission and power steering coolers.
The positives of VTM-4 are, as claimed by Honda/Acura, lighter weight (translating to better fuel economy), simpler design (more reliability?), and lower cost. The system is made by Borg-Warner.
A yaw sensor merely would measure lateral motion of a vehicle, whatever you did with the information would depend on the desires of design. A yaw sensor could be used not only for braking but to cut engine power via throttle positon or to vary torque through the clutch packs. If Honda is calling the VTM4 "full-time" 4WD, they must have a reason for using it above 18mph or on higher traction surfaces. The system must have certain intelligence for determining when to engage the rear axle at higher speeds. This would come - from sensors, right?
The VTM system allows variable torque to the axles to provide traction or to PREVENT loss of traction if slip is predicted. This can certainly occur at over 18mph, especially if one is not going in a straight line. Loss of tracion doesn't simply imply snow; wet roads or even dry roads provide variable traction based on the quality of the surface, think rubber tire "marbles" on the race track vs. the racing groove. What if you do hit a small patch of ice going around a corner. 4WD would certainly help in maintaining vehicle motion and control. Its BRAKING traction that is impaired.
The implication of AWD is that it can be used on dry surfaces WITHOUT binding. That is the entire purpose of a differential. Axle binding would occur in a front drive vehicle any time turning the vehicle since the inside and outside tire turn at different rotations, the outside tire has further to go to make the turn. In AWD, this is accounted for. You are referring to primitive part-time 4WD systems that "lock" the left/right/front/rear together so that the wheels are forced to turn at the same rotation. Audi, Subaru, Land Rover, MB Gelandewagen are all Permanent AWD, meaning they are in 4WD on dry surfaces too.
If you don't believe 4 wheels with power has a traction advantage talk to the Audi or Subaru guys. Audi has proved in racing the advantages of full-time 4WD over 2WD. Rally racing proves the same thing. Think WRX.
Also, moving forward has a lot to do with power or no. Don't believe it? Just try and go uphill on a snowy road 2WD. Not going anywhere? Maybe too much power/torque (available traction being overcome) being applied to one wheel to get that 4000 pound vehicle moving. The traction you are referring to is more related to braking or resistance to centrifugal force. That's tire quality.
To think of "full-time" 4WD just to get you unstuck from a stop would be a waste of $$, complexity, and plain weight.
Well, Honda doesn't call VTM-4 "full-time AWD." That's what the definitions on another message board here uses, and these are the definitions I've chosen to use. Doesn't Honda just call it an "AWD" system? I haven't seen recent marketing, however.
Obviously VTM-4 doesn't have any yaw sensors. I've only seen such sensors on stability control systems, which also take inputs from the steering and braking systems to try to compute what the vehicle's intended course is. Once it figures out the intended direction, as well as what direction the vehicle is going in, it applies varying amounts of braking power to individual wheels to try to correct the skid.
The upcoming Volvo XC90's yaw sensor is not purely electronic as in most stability control systems I've heard of -- it actually has a gyroscope in it!
AWD/4WD isn't just for foul weather. Some manufacturers say that it improves handling. A number of Audi quattro fans will attest to this, as would a driver of a Porsche Turbo with AWD (Motor Week road-tested one in the same episode it tested the MDX; have to admit that the MDX didn't look as exciting next to the Porsche!).
I believe that is the Redrock pearl (ie production red) in the photos...Its the same color used in the MDX...If you see it in person (at least on the MDX) it actually appears to change colors depending upon the lighting...it does look good
Actually, from hondanews.com about the Pilot, "Honda's innovative VTM-4 (Variable Torque Management 4WD) full-time, four-wheel drive system." So although they don't use the term AWD, they use "full-time," which as was discussed is more like full-time capable.
My point exactly that AWD/4WD is not just for foul weather and improves handling. Meaning that at higher speeds, it can certainly can provide benefit.
By grade sensing, I didn't mean position sensors, but would deal with throttle-position sensors in combination with acceleration/deceleration sensors.
Ah, I didn't see that marketing stuff from Honda saying it was "full time, four wheel drive." I stand corrected, thanks!
will4271:
I can't answer your question, but I can say that _if_ the Pilot leather is indeed cheaper than the MDX leather ... ugh.
The MDX leather is just "okay" in my book but it is no great shakes. It is only surface-dyed so any kind of wear through creases will show a different color (especially if you have black), requiring repair. A few MDX owners have reported what they think is unusual wear on the MDX leather. Mine is showing crinkles in some stress areas, I'm holding my breath that they don't eventually turn into cracks. Both the ML320 and the RX300, the MDX's most direct competitors (aside from the Pilot!), use higher-grade leather.
Premature leather wearing is usually correctable by the warranty, however. And one should definitely clean and condition their leather regularly. I use Lexol and it seems to work very well.
2) When the vehicle is accelerating within certain parameters. This is similar to the system in a few Subarus (Subaru has a number of different AWD systems, including one that is permanent AWD, but others that are full-time AWD). The theory is that you're trying to launch the vehicle forward and it's better for all tires to push ahead.
All subarus provide a minimum of 20% power to both axles at all times. Torque splits on ATs are 80/20 and 45/55, MTs are 50/50. They vary from those initial splits, the ATs use weight and ECU algorithms to shift power and predict when power needs to be shifted as well as speed sensors on the driveshafts, MTs use a viscous center diffy.
I am 5'10" and fit fine in the MDX. While headroom is great, I just clear going in and out of the vehicle. Someone over 6 feet might have to bend going in and out of the door...the pilot might be more suited for a taller person due to the slight body shape differences.
This article by USA Today's Jim Healy is what got my interest in the MDX, and now Pilot. Excellent real world evaluation of MDX drivetrain, and what now appears to be the Pilot drivetrain.
Ignore the picture and MDX references; think Pilot!
I would not put much value in any USA today articles about cars. They are just communications majors, not car guys. For instance in that article he was amazed that he could chirp the front tires doing a drag start. That's not "neat" that is a sloppy AWD system in my books. I guess people will buy into anything people feed them from USA and the likes though...
Yes, thanks. I think that the definitions presented in the aforementioned thread have the manual-transmission Subarus as "permanent AWD" but the others as "full-time AWD," even with 20% of the power going to the rear.
This is what Drew had written, keeping in mind that this post is a bit old:
"Subaru uses several AWD systems. The VTD AWD system in the new H6 VDC wagon is permanent AWD due to its 45/55 split. The rest of the Subaru lineup with automatic transmission gets full-time AWD. Yes, the system is proactive in certain set conditions. It can also be "locked", so to speak, in 50/50 mode with the automatic transmission lever shifted to the 1st or 2nd gear positions. The manual transmission equipped Subarus have permanent AWD with a 50/50 split (even in non-slip conditions) via the viscous coupling centre differential. The system can transfer power back and forth (due to the viscous coupling diffy), so it's not a clear cut permanent system.
"The rear limited slip differential doesn't exactly transfer power side to side in the rear wheels, but it does make the rear wheels spin at approximately the same rate (using clutch packs)...up to a certain limit."
Also, from another old post ...
"Subaru's manual transmission AWD vehicles and the new H6 VDC Outback wagon have permanent AWD (50/50 split and 45/55 split for the VDC OB). Subaru's auto tranny vehicles (excluding the VDC OB) have full-time AWD systems which are partly proactive like the MDX's system. Power is transfered to the rear upon acceleration, as well as in 1st, 2nd, and reverse gears. The Toyota Highlander and the RAV4 both also have a 50/50 split in no-slip conditions."
I think Subaru has done a very good job of bringing AWD to the masses (the 2003 Forester is on my short list for a small, second vehicle). The auto transmission AWD systems in Subarus shows that the VTM-4 system is nothing really new, despite what Honda/Acura marketing claims.
But he didn't own a subaru. He was mostly correct except that there is no 50/50 lock on the 1st and 2nd and reverse on the subarus. The Honda/Acura design isn't even H-A design, it's actually Borg Warner who also makes the TOD unit in the Trooper/VX/Axiom.
Personally I feel that having some power to both axles at all times is far safer in on-road conditions than the 100% FWD or 100%RWD systems. But that is just my opinion.
I don't interpret it too strongly in either direction. I do think there is something to it, as I have read about folks with stability control systems that have "surprised" them by cutting power (using the power-cutoff feature of the traction control system, which is a component of stability control).
But I would not take Healey's SINGLE opinion as the gospel! No other automotive journalist (and I think there are more experienced ones than Healey) have brought the same level of complaint up. I'd take his opinions more seriously if his opinion was corroborated.
The idea is that the vehicle is losing control, so why keep power going and cause more problems? In one of the scenarios Healey portrayed, it makes sense that you don't want more power being applied.
I think Healey's main gripe has to do with the level at which the power cutoff occurs. This varies significantly between different stability control systems. E.g. on MB's, the system seems to be fairly conservative, engaging more readily. On Subaru's H6 VDC, it seems to engage less readily, counting on the vehicle's capabilities to pull it out of the sticky situation. It's sort of the classic tradeoff; the system doesn't know how good a driver you are, and has to decide when to intervene, and the manufacturer builds a certain level in.
I think stability control, properly implemented, is a good thing. But it won't overcome other, significant vehicle limitations if they exist. Look at the Toyota Highlander with VSC -- despite stability control, it scored only a "below average" in the Consumer Reports emergency handling test -- same as the MDX and probably the Pilot (similarly, the Acura TL with VSA did not score particularly high for its class).
I agree, cutting power is a bad way to keep traction. From driving my TOD Trooper and my Subaru AWDs I've found when you are slipping with AWD, you PUNCH the gas and get more grip, rather than cut the power. Front LSDs and rear LSDs would also be nice to give you the same results as the traction control systems w/o cutting power and/or applying brakes. Also in off-road situations often you need to spin the wheels at 50mph or more to get un-stuck, with traction control and/or power cutting, you get into trouble in this scenario, same goes for the systems that re-enable after X mph and possible the system like the MDX/Pilot that put 100% FWD after X mph.
Here my quick comments on the Pilot drive train. Technically, it sounds as if it's FWD all the time except when you accelerate (an upgraded version of what they have on the CRV). On the plus side, I would assume that it would give better fuel mileage, but I see two negatives: - lose some cornering grip, unless you accelerate - lose some stability going downhill, since you can't apply engine brake to all four wheels.
The other thing I'm ambivalent about that transmission is that it sounds pretty complex (an electromagnetic clutch per wheel or rear wheel), and I don't know about the long term reliability. I'm one of those guys that likes the simplicity and efficiency of a viscous coupling differential. It distributes torque where it needs to go and is not prone to some computer failure.
of some sort are used on most if not all AWD Subaru automatics. I've never heard of any problems with them at all. They use viscous couplings only on the manual trannys.
Comments
Also, I've done a quick comparison between the LX and EX on the Pilot site and this is what I've found that the EX has that the LX doesn't:
AM/FM/CD/Cassette Audio System with 7 Speakers w/subwoofer vs. a AM/FM/CD w/4 speakers
Alloy Wheels
Body Colored Moldings
Rear Privacy Glass
Auto off Headlights
Remote Entry and Security System
Synchronized Auto Climate Control
Two extra cup holders (9 vs. 7 on LX)
Upper Seatback pockets
Cargo Net
8-Way Power Drivers seat.
Roof Rails
Did I miss anything? I have an order in on an EX-L and am reasonably happy with the differences between the EX and LX though it's unclear to me how much more those differences will cost me. Now I need to figure out the differences between the EX-L and the MDX. The only things I can recall that are different from when I test drove the Base MDX is the 17 inch wheels, Moon Roof, and overall styling differences (subjective value on this). Can anyone else think of anything else that is a major difference.
Thanks!
Although I haven't been checking around much, I'm suprised that they have them already. I haven't seen any at the Honda Giant or The Donkey Man in Norwood - maybe I'll swing by the Giant tonight.
FWIW, the 1st gen CR-V went without a factory moonroof (even with the SE trim) for four years. Honda just added it with the 2002 redesign. Yet, it still sold aggressively during those years. Honda will probably take the, "how many sales do we lose without it?" approach. If so, we won't see a moonroof until sales slow down.
Guy44 - All I can think to add is that "Body-Colored Moldings" includes the trailing edge of the roof line (where the CHMSL is mounted). On the LX model, this piece is matt black.
I know I've mentioned that before, but it's become a pet peeve of mine.
Also, who in their right mind need 7 or 9 cup holders? I find this many to be really unneccessary.
-mike
I've never understood the fascination with cupholders, either. It's probably because I'm not a coffee drinker.
As for having more cups than seats, I have to assume it's for convenience. The CR-V has three for the front two passengers. If a driver doesn't like the one in the dash, he/she can use the one between the seats or vice versa.
That's the only reason I can think of. Far too much attention is paid to those things.
For myself, I wouldn't want to be without my cupholders. I drink alot of coffee, but not in the car. What I *do* drink in the car is water. Sometimes alot of it, particularly on longer drives. 3, 4, even 6 hour nonstop drives are nothing, so long as I have my water. Without a sipping drink, about 2 hours is the limit before things get ugly.
At least that is what it looks like to me.
What do you think?
If you agree I need to get me one since I live in Tampa.
Ssminton - Yes, there is a locking feature like the MDX. My CR-V lacks such a device, so I spent a minute pushing the button on the dash and making "vroom" noises.
-mike
MDX was chosen as Motor Trend 2000 SUV of the year, MT initially had suspected the VTM-4 probably would not perform as good as those full time 4-WD SUVs. But the outcome surprised them. MDX performed as good as those truck base full time 4-WD SUV. If Pilot uses the same VTM-4, I think they do, then it should drive very well on snow or dirt roads.
But i don't think from me. i've wanted the rear A/C and the option for 7 seats (neither of which is covered by the HL) but i need a moonroof for the evenings and winters here. so i guess i wait for the toyota runner and the volvo xc90...
However, some of the current electronically controlled AWD vehicles use various sensors, including vehicle angle or "yaw" sensors for cornering. I would assume that going significantly up or downhill would cause the VTM system to direct some torque to the rear wheels proactively to enhance stability.
Anyway, the rep told me that the vehicles are there waiting to be sent to other dealerships on this coast. They are to be showroom models. I was told they wwould be shipped out on Monday. He also told me that they are only allowing people to see them by appointment. I don't know why. Maybe so that they can keep them clean.
Bottom line. Call them before you stop by.
Cupholds are the best thing since sliced bread. I have a 2000 Maxima with 2 in the center console. I can put anything from coffee cups and cans to large water bottles (my drink of choice). They also hold my cell phone, change and all sorts odd items. IMHO any vehicle that doesn't have good cup holders will quickly drop down on my list of potential purchases.
AWD makes you go forward.
Or reverse, depending on what gear you're in. The bottom line is; it only works if you have your foot on the gas.
Why does the locking feature cut out at 18 mph? Presumably, you need AWD because some of the tires are slipping and preventing forward motion. You need to route power to another tire to keep moving. If you are driving at speeds higher than 18 mph, there are a few possibilities we should consider.
1.) It's not that slippery. VTM4 has to protect itself from binding. A sensible person would not be driving all that fast in slippery conditions. If it's not slippery, then you shouldn't have the AWD locked because the drivetrain can bind during turns.
2.) If it is that slippery, you're going too fast and no amount of power is going to save your hide. Even if power goes to all four wheels and the spare tire, these vehicles are heavy and, despite years of watching roadrunner cartoons, I've found that the laws of physics will not be ignored.
3.) You are no longer stuck and 2WD should be sufficient. At 18+ mph, a 4,000 lbs vehicle has adequate momentum. Which leads us back to concerns raised in possibility number 2.
As I understand it, VTM4 disengages gradually. Wmquan probably has a better understanding of this than I do. I don't recall the exact speeds, but a percentage of power is sent through the rear differential under ~6mph. That percentage drops when the speed reaches the next plateau and so on. By the time you hit 18 mph, the system is fully disengaged.
To the best of my knowledge VTM4 does not use a yaw sensor. That sort of thing is found in systems like MB's ESP or even Honda's VSA. Those are brake systems, not 4X4 or AWD. They're kind of the opposite of a AWD. I've never heard of a grade sensing system, except for Grade Logic transmissions and Rover's Hill Decent Control. VTM4 activates upon slippage and when there is significant throttle input. That's all.
varmint: did they also mention the show in Boston or near Boston, where customers would be able to test drive them and sit in them? I just can't figure out how a dealership, with approx. 10 Pilots on the lot, could have dealers that know so little about the Pilots. I know Honda has a few new products this year, but when I asked to show me the LX and then the EX, none of the 4 or 5 daelers knew how to tell them apart. And they had no brochures on the Pilot........strange!!!
--> What kind of AWD?
The definition of "4WD" and "AWD" varies and is often distorted by manufacturers -- there is no consistent terminology. According to the SUV thread here entitled "4WD & AWD Systems Explained," the MDX/Pilot system (called VTM-4) is "full-time AWD." That means that the system is always capable of going into AWD, but is not necessarily always powering all four wheels. Systems that are always driving all four wheels and with a center differential are usually called "permanent AWD."
An example of "permanent AWD" is the Torsen-differential based Audi quattro system (not the one that is based on Haldex and is also called quattro, however).
--> How does the MDX (and Pilot) AWD work?
The MDX is, most of the time, purely front-wheel drive only. Power is sent to the rear wheels under three circumstances, only one of which is under the driver's direct control:
1) When slippage is detected. This is a function of most AWD systems. I believe up to 50% of power can be sent to the rear, though I may be off a few percentage points. When power is sent to the rear, it can be apportioned between each rear wheel. However, VTM-4 cannot apportion power between the two front wheels.
2) When the vehicle is accelerating within certain parameters. This is similar to the system in a few Subarus (Subaru has a number of different AWD systems, including one that is permanent AWD, but others that are full-time AWD). The theory is that you're trying to launch the vehicle forward and it's better for all tires to push ahead.
3) When the "VTM-4 lock" is engaged by the driver. One confusing aspect is that some people consider this VTM-4 when VTM-4 is the overall system, and the "lock" is just a feature. In this case, up to half of the vehicle's power is sent to the rear, AND both of the rear wheels are locked so they do not spin independently. This only works in first or second gear, and it begins to reduce the percentage at speeds approaching 18mph, upon which the "lock" mode is automatically disengaged by the VTM-4 system. This mode is meant to get the driver out of a sticky situation, so he or she can get moving.
The power is distributed through a propeller shaft to the rear wheels, where two electronically-controlled clutch packs transfer power to the rear wheels. It is not a true rear differential as I understand it.
--> How well does VTM-4 work?
This has been the subject of a lot of debate, and a lot of the debate is academic as opposed to real-world (from people who haven't tried the MDX in snow). Academic opinions on VTM-4 on paper range from positive to scorn. Real-world opinions are generally quite positive. I've seen posts from MDX owners in Minnesota and other snowy parts, and they've been happy. Main complaints I've seen are what happens when a lot of snow/ice builds up between the wheel and the mudguard, and because of the lack of stability control (some sliding, especially when stopping on slippery ice/snow while going uphill, and starting again).
But a lot of snow/tire capability isn't just in the drive system. Tires obviously have a lot to do with it, along with the driver's abilities.
As previously discussed, the MDX/Pilot lacks stability control, which is useful for skidding conditions that can cause the rear to fishtail under slippery conditions. In such cases, the VTM-4 system can't help much if at all. Most notable is that if you're braking, very little torque is being delivered to the rear, so not much happens there.
Stability control systems have yaw sensors, along with input from the steering and braking systems, and try to brake selected wheels in varying degrees to balance out the skid. Even they have limits, since if there's near-zero traction, you're up the creek. Still, I think the MDX/Pilot should have it. It would help with the slight fishtailing tendency that Consumer Reports and Motor Week noted with the MDX, and that will probably be in the Pilot too.
Generally, VTM-4 is not as sophisticated as Honda/Acura marketing promotes it as. There is no transfer case, no low-range, which is useful for traditional SUV tasks like towing and some off-roading.
I think that it's a better-than-average full-time AWD system, mainly because it does have the proactive acceleration and manual lock modes. It won't handle every situation like permanent AWD or permanent 4WD would, but for me, those are very rare situations that I don't find myself in. That's not to say I won't ever get stuck, I can only say it hasn't happened yet. Most of my experience is with the mountain passes east of the Seattle area, where there's a lot of rainy, slushy, or simply snow/ice covered roads. So far the MDX has done fine, though we are careful.
Others point out that the vehicle can still get stuck if only one of the front wheels has traction, since the power can't be split between the two front wheels. However, this is what I meant about the discussion getting somewhat academic.
The major criticism of VTM-4 applies to most full-time AWD systems, especially the ones that deliver no power to the rear wheels under normal driving conditions (some full-time AWD systems deliver 10% to 20% of power to the rear under normal conditions). The system is reactive under normal cruising (not accelerating, or locking VTM-4). Slippage must be detected by ABS sensors first, then power transferred by engaging the clutch packs. There is a time delay, though I don't know precisely how long. This is typical of electronic systems, which take reading of mechanical conditions, and then decide how to apply mechanical controls. The Torsen-based quattro can react mechanically in a much quicker time frame.
I know that the system in the XC90 reacts within about 1/7th of a tire rotation. I don't know if VTM-4 is that fast. Critics of these transfer systems point out that such a delay may provide enough time for the vehicle to get into more trouble. Others say that under most slippery conditions, the reaction time is more than adequate.
One point that has come up is whether or not the VTM-4 system will be more prone to overheating and perhaps long-term durability issues. The clutch packs, not being true differentials, aren't designed to hold up to long, sustained torque transfer. E.g. I wouldn't drive with VTM-4 engaged for long periods, and, with its limitations on engagement, is precisely how Honda/Acura intends it.
Honda/Acura require that all towing be done with extra transmission and power steering coolers.
The positives of VTM-4 are, as claimed by Honda/Acura, lighter weight (translating to better fuel economy), simpler design (more reliability?), and lower cost. The system is made by Borg-Warner.
Generally, I think the
A yaw sensor merely would measure lateral motion of a vehicle, whatever you did with the information would depend on the desires of design. A yaw sensor could be used not only for braking but to cut engine power via throttle positon or to vary torque through the clutch packs. If Honda is calling the VTM4 "full-time" 4WD, they must have a reason for using it above 18mph or on higher traction surfaces. The system must have certain intelligence for determining when to engage the rear axle at higher speeds. This would come - from sensors, right?
The VTM system allows variable torque to the axles to provide traction or to PREVENT loss of traction if slip is predicted. This can certainly occur at over 18mph, especially if one is not going in a straight line. Loss of tracion doesn't simply imply snow; wet roads or even dry roads provide variable traction based on the quality of the surface, think rubber tire "marbles" on the race track vs. the racing groove. What if you do hit a small patch of ice going around a corner. 4WD would certainly help in maintaining vehicle motion and control. Its BRAKING traction that is impaired.
The implication of AWD is that it can be used on dry surfaces WITHOUT binding. That is the entire purpose of a differential. Axle binding would occur in a front drive vehicle any time turning the vehicle since the inside and outside tire turn at different rotations, the outside tire has further to go to make the turn. In AWD, this is accounted for. You are referring to primitive part-time 4WD systems that "lock" the left/right/front/rear together so that the wheels are forced to turn at the same rotation. Audi, Subaru, Land Rover, MB Gelandewagen are all Permanent AWD, meaning they are in 4WD on dry surfaces too.
If you don't believe 4 wheels with power has a traction advantage talk to the Audi or Subaru guys. Audi has proved in racing the advantages of full-time 4WD over 2WD. Rally racing proves the same thing. Think WRX.
Also, moving forward has a lot to do with power or no. Don't believe it? Just try and go uphill on a snowy road 2WD. Not going anywhere? Maybe too much power/torque (available traction being overcome) being applied to one wheel to get that 4000 pound vehicle moving. The traction you are referring to is more related to braking or resistance to centrifugal force. That's tire quality.
To think of "full-time" 4WD just to get you unstuck from a stop would be a waste of $$, complexity, and plain weight.
Obviously VTM-4 doesn't have any yaw sensors. I've only seen such sensors on stability control systems, which also take inputs from the steering and braking systems to try to compute what the vehicle's intended course is. Once it figures out the intended direction, as well as what direction the vehicle is going in, it applies varying amounts of braking power to individual wheels to try to correct the skid.
The upcoming Volvo XC90's yaw sensor is not purely electronic as in most stability control systems I've heard of -- it actually has a gyroscope in it!
AWD/4WD isn't just for foul weather. Some manufacturers say that it improves handling. A number of Audi quattro fans will attest to this, as would a driver of a Porsche Turbo with AWD (Motor Week road-tested one in the same episode it tested the MDX; have to admit that the MDX didn't look as exciting next to the Porsche!).
I believe that is the Redrock pearl (ie production red) in the photos...Its the same color used in the MDX...If you see it in person (at least on the MDX) it actually appears to change colors depending upon the lighting...it does look good
My point exactly that AWD/4WD is not just for foul weather and improves handling. Meaning that at higher speeds, it can certainly can provide benefit.
By grade sensing, I didn't mean position sensors, but would deal with throttle-position sensors in combination with acceleration/deceleration sensors.
It seems that way in the pics from the auto shows.
Just curious.
Ah, I didn't see that marketing stuff from Honda saying it was "full time, four wheel drive." I stand corrected, thanks!
will4271:
I can't answer your question, but I can say that _if_ the Pilot leather is indeed cheaper than the MDX leather ... ugh.
The MDX leather is just "okay" in my book but it is no great shakes. It is only surface-dyed so any kind of wear through creases will show a different color (especially if you have black), requiring repair. A few MDX owners have reported what they think is unusual wear on the MDX leather. Mine is showing crinkles in some stress areas, I'm holding my breath that they don't eventually turn into cracks. Both the ML320 and the RX300, the MDX's most direct competitors (aside from the Pilot!), use higher-grade leather.
Premature leather wearing is usually correctable by the warranty, however. And one should definitely clean and condition their leather regularly. I use Lexol and it seems to work very well.
All subarus provide a minimum of 20% power to both axles at all times. Torque splits on ATs are 80/20 and 45/55, MTs are 50/50. They vary from those initial splits, the ATs use weight and ECU algorithms to shift power and predict when power needs to be shifted as well as speed sensors on the driveshafts, MTs use a viscous center diffy.
-mike
Ignore the picture and MDX references; think Pilot!
http://www.usatoday.com/money/columns/healey/0029.htm
-mike
This is what Drew had written, keeping in mind that this post is a bit old:
"Subaru uses several AWD systems. The VTD AWD system in the new H6 VDC wagon is permanent AWD due to its 45/55 split. The rest of the Subaru lineup with automatic transmission gets full-time AWD. Yes, the system is proactive in certain set conditions. It can also be "locked", so to speak, in 50/50 mode with the automatic transmission lever shifted to the 1st or 2nd gear positions. The manual transmission equipped Subarus have permanent AWD with a 50/50 split (even in non-slip conditions) via the viscous coupling centre differential. The system can transfer power back and forth (due to the viscous coupling diffy), so it's not a clear cut permanent system.
"The rear limited slip differential doesn't exactly transfer power side to side in the rear wheels, but it does make the rear wheels spin at approximately the same rate (using clutch packs)...up to a certain limit."
Also, from another old post ...
"Subaru's manual transmission AWD vehicles and the new H6 VDC Outback wagon have permanent AWD (50/50 split and 45/55 split for the VDC OB). Subaru's auto tranny vehicles (excluding the VDC OB) have full-time AWD systems which are partly proactive like the MDX's system. Power is transfered to the rear upon acceleration, as well as in 1st, 2nd, and reverse gears. The Toyota Highlander and the RAV4 both also have a 50/50 split in no-slip conditions."
I think Subaru has done a very good job of bringing AWD to the masses (the 2003 Forester is on my short list for a small, second vehicle). The auto transmission AWD systems in Subarus shows that the VTM-4 system is nothing really new, despite what Honda/Acura marketing claims.
Personally I feel that having some power to both axles at all times is far safer in on-road conditions than the 100% FWD or 100%RWD systems. But that is just my opinion.
-mike
But I would not take Healey's SINGLE opinion as the gospel! No other automotive journalist (and I think there are more experienced ones than Healey) have brought the same level of complaint up. I'd take his opinions more seriously if his opinion was corroborated.
The idea is that the vehicle is losing control, so why keep power going and cause more problems? In one of the scenarios Healey portrayed, it makes sense that you don't want more power being applied.
I think Healey's main gripe has to do with the level at which the power cutoff occurs. This varies significantly between different stability control systems. E.g. on MB's, the system seems to be fairly conservative, engaging more readily. On Subaru's H6 VDC, it seems to engage less readily, counting on the vehicle's capabilities to pull it out of the sticky situation. It's sort of the classic tradeoff; the system doesn't know how good a driver you are, and has to decide when to intervene, and the manufacturer builds a certain level in.
I think stability control, properly implemented, is a good thing. But it won't overcome other, significant vehicle limitations if they exist. Look at the Toyota Highlander with VSC -- despite stability control, it scored only a "below average" in the Consumer Reports emergency handling test -- same as the MDX and probably the Pilot (similarly, the Acura TL with VSA did not score particularly high for its class).
With the MDX, final pricing didn't come out until a month before delivery. I assume we're getting really close.
-mike
- lose some cornering grip, unless you accelerate
- lose some stability going downhill, since you can't apply engine brake to all four wheels.
The other thing I'm ambivalent about that transmission is that it sounds pretty complex (an electromagnetic clutch per wheel or rear wheel), and I don't know about the long term reliability. I'm one of those guys that likes the simplicity and efficiency of a viscous coupling differential. It distributes torque where it needs to go and is not prone to some computer failure.
If I'm off base, please correct me.
Bob