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
-mike
Although so far, the MDX has folowed the Odyssey trend of initial price inflation and good resale value. It is reasonable to assume that the Pilot will follow suit.
BTW, I also don't think the Silhouette is a fair measure for the GM side because it isn't a strong seller and frankly, the Odyssey is the better choice/value.
Personally, I don't understand the logic of comparing the Pilot to the Aztek or Legacy. I think the Pilot-Rendezvous-MDX comparison is the most compelling since they are all "non-truck, 3-row SUV's." They have similar capabilities, features, and specifications.
-mike
"BTW, I also don't think the Silhouette is a fair measure for the GM side because it isn't a strong seller and frankly, the Odyssey is the better choice/value."
You bet it is. Look at the horrible IIHS offset crash test scores on the GM minivans:
http://www.iihs.org/vehicle_ratings/ce/html/96026.htm
So when GM based the Rendezvous on the awful minivan platform, it made enhancements to improve the crash test safety, enough so the Rendezvous scores "Acceptable." Certainly a strong improvement that GM deserves credit for, but, with a foundation on such an unsound platform (the minivans), they could only go so far. They fell short of what today's SUV's should score.
Whereas Honda/Acura built the MDX (and now the Pilot) off of the Odyssey platform, which was a "Good" in the same test, but not a "best pick" designation. The MDX received enhancements to further improve crashworthiness, and thus tested not only "Good" but a "Best Pick." In fact, the second-highest score that IIHS has given to an SUV (the X5 scored highest).
The Pilot should do similarly well. Those who need actual confirmation should wait several months for the test results to be released.
"Oh, and for $1000 less purchase price, the Oldsmobile comes with: power passenger seat, heated mirrors, wood trim, 2 driver seat memory, OnStar, and fog lights."
Yep, it comes with more gadgets to entertain you, along with OnStar so the paramedics can locate the critically wounded (or worse) occupants after an offset crash. No thanks, I'd gladly pay the $1,000 more and forgo those extras!
And then of course many will spend another thousand or so on an Extended Warranty.
Honda is laughing all the way to the bank.
Plus well before general release, dealers sometimes get units to get familiar with.
They also said there are June/July vehicles to be had, however I wouldn't get my choice of color and trim, for that I would have to wait. Similar to the MDX, when it first came out, I could have had one right away. I decided to wait until the second year to make sure any initial problems get worked out, and then I had to wait 4 months.
I'm sure we are all curious to know where you purchased your Pilot. It might be worth the plane ticket to save a couple grand on purchase price
Shane
I wonder if the heater gismo in the ody or mdx seats will fit the Pilot Hmmmmmmm
Get an ex cloth, and add a pioneer or alpine dvd nav in dash system. i think they have a model that has 3 disk changer, then again the face plate and depth question.
The 03 Pilot EXLRES and the 02 Odyssey EXLRES are basically the same price despite the fact that the Pilot has All wheel drive. . . .I think that it is great that they are not wanting thousands more for the AWD transmission. . . .and if they had to take the heated seats away to do that, I'm okay with it.
Shane
This was a discussion about resale value, not crash tests (your favorite topic). I can't fathom why you insist on sticking your doom and gloom diatribe into every discussion, regardless of the topic.
Isn't one Joan Claybrook is enough?
"This was a discussion about resale value, not crash tests (your favorite topic). I can't fathom why you insist on sticking your doom and gloom diatribe into every discussion, regardless of the topic.
"Isn't one Joan Claybrook is enough?"
Enough of the personal insults, okay?
Crashworthiness is certainly a relevant topic for those considering a vehicle purchase. You brought up (as you repeatedly do, but I do not call it tiresome or a mantra) alternative vehicles, and their benefits. I brought up the advantage of the Pilot in terms of safety, which is a highly relevant area that many shoppers are interested in.
I know you don't like the fact that your preferred vehicle doesn't do as well in crash tests, but if you're going to bring up the advantages of a vehicle, someone is going to bring up the disadvantages.
The Pilot is a vehicle that should do very well in crash tests, though those who want absolute proof should wait several months or so.
Odyssey TMV: 28,500 + 8% tax = $30,800
Silhouette TMV: 26,800 - 2000 rebate + 8% tax = $26,800
1999 Odyssey TMV ("clean" trade-in, 40K miles): $19,000
1999 Silhouette TMV ("clean" trade-in, 40K miles): $11,800
OK, now the math. Depreciation:
Honda: 30,800 - 19,000 = $11,800
Olds: 26,800 - 11,800 = $15,000
So, the difference is only $3,200.
Don't get me wrong. I agree that the Honda is a better product and a better value. All I'm saying is that if you go below the TMV surface and compare "apples to apples", the differnce between the two is definitely not $8700!
It seems that every time anyone says something positive about GM, no matter what the topic, you feel compelled to regurgitate crash test data...which is of questionable value to begin with.
For instance, last week when someone casually mentioned that Motor Trend magazine compared the Aztek to the Pilot, you posted the IIHS and NHTSA sites and further stated:
<<is the "idiot" the one who paid more, or the one who is putting their family at significantly greater risk?>>
Again this week, you interpret IIHS data (did you leave out the NHTSA stats because the Silhouette did well there?) and imply that if you're driving a GM minivan, your life is in grave peril.
<<...so the paramedics can locate the critically wounded (or worse) occupants...>>
You do have a knack for drama.
I don't have a problem with you posting data that you believe is valid. I have a problem with your interpretation of the data and leaps of faith.
Some time ago on the MDX board, I pointed out to you (in response to yet another one of your IIHS links) that the Highlander performed much worse than the RX300 in head protection and much better in footwell integrity, and I felt the data indicated that a larger sampling was needed to know the true safety ratings for these (twin) vehicles.
Now you state that the MDX is a good measure for how the Pilot will do. Well, if you feel that the Pilot and MDX are the same vehicle, then look at this:
If you compile the seat and steering column movement data from the Aztek with the airbag performance of the Rendezvous, they combine to create an IIHS "Good" level of crash protection.
BTW, in response to your comment that the Rendezvous "...fell short of what today's SUV's should score." According to the IIHS, the Buick Rendezvous performed as well as or better than the CR-V, Pathfinder, Discovery (I and II), Montero, Rodeo/Passport, RAV-4, Durango, Trooper, and Grand Cherokee, to name a few.
Sorry about the Claybrook comment...maybe you prefer Ralph Nader?
"It seems that every time anyone says something positive about GM, no matter what the topic, you feel compelled to regurgitate crash test data...which is of questionable value to begin with."
That's simply because someone is trying to point out advantages of some vehicles that happen to be GM, while not pointing out the disadvantages of those particular vehicles -- in the Pilot topic! Since those folks are trying to compare the vehicle favorably with the Pilot, why NOT bring up something where the proposed vehicle does not compare favorably with the Pilot? Especially when it comes to safety, one of the key weaknesses of GM vehicles as a whole.
Fair is fair. You don't find me in the Rendezvous discussion constantly bringing up the Pilot or MDX, do you? Yet you and your compatriot are constantly bring up non-Pilot vehicles in the Pilot discussion topic, even though those discussions belong in a separate comparison topic. So if you're going to bring up the positive aspects of your favored vehicles compared to the Pilot, you should expect someone to bring up the negative aspects of the comparison too.
In other words, if you can't take the heat, get out of the kitchen.
"For instance, last week when someone casually mentioned that Motor Trend magazine compared the Aztek to the Pilot, you posted the IIHS and NHTSA sites and further stated:"
It was more than someone casually mentioning it, if you read back in the thread. My response was a summary response to the previous set of posts, not just a casual single mention.
"Again this week, you interpret IIHS data (did you leave out the NHTSA stats because the Silhouette did well there?) and imply that if you're driving a GM minivan, your life is in grave peril."
No, I feel that both IIHS and NHTSA stats must BOTH be good for a vehicle to be considered of high crashworthiness. It's not enough that one be good while the other not, since they test different aspects of crash performance.
Should I have also brought up that the Rendezvous only got 3-stars (out of 5) for the NHTSA test while I'm at it? I didn't in the message posted yesterday because I was specifically addressing the GM minivans.
"<<...so the paramedics can locate the critically wounded (or worse) occupants...>>
"You do have a knack for drama."
More personal insults.
"I don't have a problem with you posting data that you believe is valid. I have a problem with your interpretation of the data and leaps of faith ..."
Actually, I feel that you've misinterpreted or have bent the findings of the IIHS and NHTSA tests to portray your favored vehicle in a better light. How hard is it to interpret "3 stars out of 5" and "Acceptable, but not Good?" or plain "Poor"? Those were created to make it easy for the layman to understand.
You're getting quite upset by this. Could it be that you're upset that the vehicle you bought, on the faith that it would be crashworthy, then proved to be less than crashworthy in the crash tests? Thus your family is riding around in a vehicle that is not as safe as you would have hoped? I know you had hoped for a four-star rollover resistance rating, but that wasn't the case.
As far as my comment that today's SUV should score better, look at:
http://www.iihs.org/vehicle_ratings/ce/html/summary_midsuv.htm
You'll find 8 vehicles that outperform your favored vehicle. Most of the others are older designs so it's not surprising they don't do as well (e.g. CR-V, Pathfinder, Disco II, Rodeo/Passport, Trooper, etc.). For the ones that aren't, there's no excuse for them.
It still may be on the conservative side, but that's not surprizing. They did the same thing for the MDX. Also, it makes a bit of sense that they wouldn't brag about the 0-60 times of the Pilot knowing that it wouldn't be good for their Acura dealers.
Yes, Honda/Acura was conservative on the MDX. The 8.1 second 0-60 times should be about right.
Say, did your alter ego find chromed stainless steel on the tailpipe, to answer rms41's question? I know the MDX's dual tailpipe is claimed to be chromed stainless steel. It is shiny but I've never bent down to really look at it up close (something strange about the mental picture).
I _do_ know that the muffler housing does seem to look pretty old really fast, same as it did in our old Integra.
http://www.collegehillshonda.com/new/pilot/funpilotart/npt16.jpg
I thought a unibody meant you really couldn't have a rolling frame.
I'm clueless here, HELP!
Also noticed somewhere some mention that the storage door can be left open to deepen the cargo compartment behind the third row -- noticed your photo had a tie-cord holding it open but not all the way. Did that tie-cord seem standard or just something to show off the compartment?
Finally, the MDX's storage door is purely rectangular, while the Pilot's has some side notches on it -- probably making it wider than the MDX's. Any idea on the function served by that?
http://acuramdx.phpwebhosting.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=5727
Thanks for the Pilot/MDX info. Confirms what I have reasoned about the C&D, R&T, and MT accel times. The MW 0-60 is consistent with the Consumer Reports 8 sec test from idle.
Wish I had such info for Pilot LX vs EX comparo. Sure seems like I will be paying a premium for the EX; $2,370. Guess I need a brochure.
rms41:
If Pilot exhaust is like my 99 Ody exhaust, it is St. Stl. I was up close and personal with it while changing oil yesterday. Still looks near new.
You're both very welcome.
Regarding LX vs. EX vs. EX-L:
I think Honda's Pilot site has a good link that illustrates differences between the LX and EX. You may need to sign in before trying this link, not sure if they've made it public yet:
http://pilot.honda.com/specs.asp?lstSpecs=ALL
What it doesn't mention is that the LX may come with different tires (brand and model). This according to what SuperSpy saw.
I do agree with the assessment that the LX is quite the basic bargain. Especially for the folks that can do without the differences between the LX and EX/EX-L. Some can, some won't, it's up to their buying preferences.
As is typical with a lot of Honda/Acura trims, the dollar value of the price difference may not justify the sum total of what the individual differences should cost! It's that way with the MDX Touring Package, for example. However, as much of buying a vehicle is about preferences, needs, and wants than it is on a straight accounting basis. Some folks will go for the LX, some for the EX.
I thought that buying a Toyota/Lexus might make it easier to stack options the way I'd want it, but then I found out that the regional dealers basically set their own artificial trim levels. It's like pulling teeth to get the vehicle optioned the way you want, though at least you have a chance.
Anyone know if the dealers have the actual color samples yet of Sandstone or Sagebrush?
Standard equipment on LX models include a 240-horsepower, VTEC V-6 engine and five-speed automatic transmission; Honda's VTM-4 (Variable Torque Management 4WD) four-wheel drive system; air-conditioning; cruise control, AM/FM stereo with CD player, power windows, door locks and mirrors, and dual front and side airbags.
EX models will carry a suggested retail price of $29,270 and add alloy wheels; automatic climate control; 8-way power driver's seat with adjustable lumbar support; stereo with cassette player, six-disc CD changer and steering-wheel mounted stereo controls; roof rails; and second row fold-down kid's activity tray. EX models with leather interior trim will be priced at $30,520 and may also be equipped with a DVD Entertainment System at $32,020; or Honda's satellite-linked DVD Navigation System for $32,520.
My only comment... Alloy wheels should be standard, otherwise not too bad if you don't pay over MSRP.
Is it needed and is it something that has to be done every few years?
Don't fall for their deception!
Then I see this on the college hills site:
http://www.collegehillshonda.com/new/pilot/funpilotart/npt16.jpg
Am I the only one surprised by this picture? If so, where am I confused?
Sorry for the repeat post, this forum moves so quickly the previous post had paged up, and I'm really curious, too.
thank
mike
The cord that holds up the cover is standard equipment. I fixed it to the nearest headrest just for that pic. I could've made it tighter by adjusting the cord or moving it to another headrest.
Dunno about the notches in the sides. I'll have to double check my pics.
I saw two different tires on the vehicles, but I cannot say for sure if they are linked to the trim levels. That is not the case with the CR-V, which also uses two different tires.
GM - Standard alloy wheels? That's right up there with standard bud vase on my list of priorities. Personally, I'm more impressed with standard AWD and a powerful engine. You don't find those on other "base models".
Which makes me lean towards the LX as well....$2400 for LX to EX !?!!!
The tires are likely to be "rim protectors" anyway like the Firestone Affinitys that came with my 99 Ody.
What do the LX wheels look like anyway?
I am especially bummed about the fact that it doesn't come with a standard picnic table. I mean, come on Honda, the CR-V has had this for years! I would gladly give up the third row seat for a picnic table. Do you think they will offer this as an option? Maybe they will offer a "PE" (Picnic Edition) trim level, which will include the table, a couple of those nifty collapsible aluminum chairs, a mini-fridge, and a moonroof.
I wonder if I could take take a picnic table out of my CR-V when I trade it in for a Pilot. Do you think the dealer would notice? ;-)
If it ends up being offered as a pricey option, is it better to buy an after market one which can hold more CDs and have it installed under the seat. Has anyone had any experience with this on other Honda models?
Protection package
6 disc in-dash CD changer
CD Changer
Cassette Player
Rear View Camera
Back Up Sensors
Security
Keyless Entry System
Air Deflector
Trailer Hitch
Roof Rack
Crossbars
Bike Attachment
Ski Attachment
Door Mirror Covers (chrome)
Bumper Garnish (chrome)
Foglights
Auto Day/Night Mirror
All-Season Floor Mats
Nose Maks
Gold Emblem Kit
Lower Trim
Running Boards
Side Steps
Splash Guards
16" Alloy Wheels
Wheel Locks
Ashtray
Luggage Net
Cargo cover/Liner/Organizer/Tray
Separation Net
Wood-Grain Trim
Wood Select Lever
Wood-Grain Steering Wheel
Engine Block Heater