larry - my rattle seems to have disappeared after the visit to the dealership last week. i'm wondering if it wasn't more an issue of dealer prep than anything else. otherwise, i really love my pilot. and this was a heavily researched & higly anticipated purchase for me, so i had high expectations. i have been extremely pleased with the ride. pchiu - the leather in my '99 volvo was probably "nicer" - thicker & softer, as you mentioned. but the pilot leather isn't such that i was struck by the low quality. with a 2-yo & another child on the way, i'm more concerned with durability/ability to withstand spills than with "luxury."
When you guys talk about a "later" model coming out with a moon roof, etc., do you mean that options like that could come in the NEXT model year? I know Honda only changes body styles every 5 (or something like that) years...but are you telling me that, for each and every year, the Pilot could start providing different options? Or would it probably be a few years until that would happen?
h1vc- Nope. It happened every time we would start the car. Go out in the morning to work, it would happen. Park it at Walmart, come out to start it, and it would happen. As long as we turned the engine off, the problem was bound to return until the next time we tried to start the car again.
Honda has gone to a 5 year cycle on model introductions. Around the 3rd/4th year they make minor revisions/add new features to keep the model fresh.
As for new model - if history repeats itself, Honda will offer a moonroof in the next gen Pilot (2008 model) just like they started to offer it in the 2nd gen CRV.
It is just a guess on my side only. There is no inside information about any new option for Pilot. All these extra options or features are existing in the MDX. It is quite common that a new model will rush out without some features,to set a low price, then later when they see the demand they will put the opinions in, as a package or as 'Special Edition'. But they may also want to distance Pilot from MDX in terms of options that you can get. But you never know when they will put in new option, maybe very quick or may not happen ever. That is why I quote the CR-V real case.
Similar to the 1st gen CR-V, the Pilot is a mid-year intro. The CR-V got a power and equipment update in 1999, less than 2 model years after intro. My guess is the Pilot will have only a 4-year cycle for the 1st go-around, partly because of the mid-year intro and partly to enable Honda to introduce the next model approx. at the same time frame as the next MDX. So, I'm guessing and hoping, that it will be a short wait before Honda puts more goodies into the Pilot.
I'd be interested in how you fare with the Bravada. The new GM SUV triplets are actually quite attractive. A few things that do have me concerned are gas mileage, build quality and reliability, and driveability (ie. would it be too truckish compared to the Pilot)
I've had mine for over two weeks now and the vehicle is flawless and the leather looks great. Break in peroid is done and it really has much more "juice" than I remember from the test drives.
No rattles, squeaks or flaws that I have found (have 700 miles on it).
I will admit that the leather is no where near as thick as on our 2002 Passat, but I have no issues with it either.
I was quoted $1,095 by my dealer for the Honda Care 7yr/100k. They also said that I have two years to buy it. I plan on waiting to see how the vehicle shakes out reliability wise. Then I'll decide to either plop down for the warranty or sell it after the 3/36 expires.
bengelking: Thanks for the feedback on HondaCare...I am picking up my new Pilot EX tonight and I will hold off on adding this ext.warranty coverage...Hope that my initial Pilot experience is as good as yours!
You can't really compare the 1st gen CR-V's lack of a moonroof with the Pilot. When Honda designed the CR-V, they offered it to the dealers in the US. At the time, they were happy with the Passport (I'm not making that up), and they said, "thanks, but no thanks", to the CR-V. It wasn't until a year after the CR-V was in production they decided to bring it over to the NA market.
Why does this matter?
Since inception (in 1996), the CR-V has had a moonroof. It's a JDM style moonroof, which the US buyers would probably frown upon. It's positioned behind the driver's head and is more or less for the rear seat occupants.
Rumor has it, in order to keep a stiff roof structure, Honda put a structural support right through the area where the US style moonroof would fit. That's supposed to be the reason why Honda didn't offer a moonroof until the vehicle was completely re designed for 2002.
What does this have to do with the Pilot?
The Pilot was designed specifically for the NA market. Unlike the CR-V, I doubt that there is a significant engineering reason for the lack of a moonroof. It is much more likely that the reasoning is purely to defend the MDX from too much in-house competition. When the Acura has more content to fend off comparison with it's little brother, the Pilot will most likely get a moonroof option.
I stopped by local Honda dealer again to check out Pilot. Prior visit they were closed and I got turned off by the $795 "appearance protection" package that was padded on a dealer sticker, together with numerous DIO that were not even on the vehicles. I was surprised to see they still had some Pilots in stock from initial shipment. When I inquired about the pricing, they told me they would do MSRP without the DIO. In talking to him I learned that they have had waves of people kicking tires in response to newspaper ads but have not sold that many yet. He expects more interest "once the word gets out". Several potential customers told them the third row seat is useless and it was a deal breaker for them (I got this after telling him I had no need for it). Seems their plan to gouge customers was spawned from greater sales expectations, but they are having change of heart to move some units. Has me wondering if Pilot has the stuff to reach the type of fame as the Ody, there really is not the same level of innovation here that Honda applied to becoming minivan king.
Imagine the Pilot stretched by a few inches...legroom in the 3rd row would be more accomodating. It may still not seat an adult, but the critics won't be able to complain about a lack of legroom back there.
The Odyssey's bucket-to-bench seats could've been applied to the Pilot as an option (especially on the EX if that middle seat is really as worthless as some here say).
It's still a fine vehicle, but it won't redefine the segment as much as the Odyssey did.
Honda should have put in 2nd row bucket seats with drop down "activity trays" built into the back of the front seats ala airplane seats. That would accomplish 2 things. 1. make access to the 3rd row much easier, and 2. create more legroom for the third row, especially the middle position. It would statistically lose 1 seat but it would make the remaining 7 much more useable.
when the mdx comes out this fall do you think there will be any changes to the pilot for fall or first of the year? what's the advantage of getting the pilot out now maybe people aren't ready yet till the fall when more models to choose from.
"when the mdx comes out this fall do you think there will be any changes to the pilot for fall or first of the year?"
The Pilot is an early-intro 2003 model. I think the chances are virtually zero that they would have a 2003.5 refresh on a brand new model! It's not like the vehicle is not moving off the lots at all, judging from all the folks paying MSRP or above MSRP.
Honda (and quite a few automakers) does not react that quickly in model year refreshes. Sometimes Honda waits quite a while, beyond what some of its more impatient fans want. Sometimes it's quite prudent.
If Honda was really timely, the MDX would have been updated before the Pilot launch. The MDX would have already had stability control (heck, the Pilot should have stability control). Their stability control system would be full-range like the German vehicles, unlike Acura's VSA and Toyota's VSC. The MDX and Pilot would have Brake Assist. Their vehicles in general would have side curtain airbags or some kind of head protection. You'd be able to get not only xenons but bi-xenons. I'll bet the 2003 MDX does not have all the features some folks are dreaming up for it. It'd cost as much as an ML320 then and Acura won't price it that high.
After 7 months with our Bravada, we still have not really had any problems (aside from a sticky handle) or rattles with the truck. In terms of ride, the Honda is slightly more car like, but the luxury of the Bravada interior and suspension more than make up for the truck frame it's built on. Build quality is good, but not as good as Honda. The I-6 in the Bravada is more powerful in every way than the Pilot engine and gas mileage as been exactly as advertised.
They are both good vehicles, but the Honda is a bit expensive for what you get IMHO. We almost got an Envoy, but my wife liked the Bravada interior better. I think these trucks had a few issues when they came out but they seem to be mostly resolved now.
I would agree with all the safety features that you mentioned should be with the Pilot.Safety is high up in my list. And I will expect The Pilot will be more expensive.But how much more is acceptable ?
The Toyoto Highlander will be (roughly) $46,000 if loaded with all these safety features, with the highest trim. I just need the 3rd seat.
The MB Ml320, the lower model with cloth saets (Canadina only)will have every safety features. Selling $50,000 add $1,300 for the cloth 3rd seat. This sounds good, but by the time I checked (early June 2002), they do not have 3rd seat ML320 available in Toronto. As production of 2002 has ended, they are producting 2003. They say may locate out of Totonto, but I do not think I can negotiate the price for a year end model if not from Toronto.
The Volvo XC90 coming in Nov 2002, will be $55,000.
So the final decision is to get the Pilot now, for the 3rd seat 8 passengers. At least I switch from a sedan to a higher SUV, to due with the concern that so many SUVs out there will cause more damage to my family in a sedan.
The Honda claims the Pilot has a 'clip' in the front to due with the problem of causing more damage to other sedans. So does the MB and Volvo, not sure about Toyota. As I do not want these things happen to other family too.
Yes, most people inculding myself, when they look or seat in the 3rd seat of my car, ask to crack open the rear most window (next to the 3rd seat). I reply, I cannot, it is a fix window. Hope the rear A/C will really help.
The problem with the MDX/Pilot is that the rear windows, if they were operational, would require space below it to reside in (like the two windows before it) when they are lowered. It's just not possible with the wheel well right there.
I think a better solution would be to have a small moonroof back there for ventilation. Nothing big or fancy, perhaps just a small 17 inch hole in the roof that opens up. If Honda can put it in the Element SUV, there's no reason why they can't do it with the MDX (especially the MDX).
They could-should do pushouts or sliding ones like the old TLCs/Monteros had. That requires no space, or very little, and doesn't take away from headroom.
I wonder if the reason Honda left the operable rear window out of the Pilot and MDX was a carbon monoxide issue due to the third-row seating. For people sitting in the the third row, an open window behind them, above the exhaust, might result in those folks having to suck up exhaust fumes.
I know that in my CR-V, when I am carrying long items in the back and have the rear window open while driving, I can smell the exhaust coming in from the rear. I open all the front windows and crank the vents to make sure the air is fresh up front. But since there is no third row in the CR-V, they can get away with the pop-up window.
I remember that old-time station wagons (we called 'em "beach wagons" hehe) with third-row seats and rear windows that would slide down into the tailgate, sometimes had spoilers on the roof above to deflect fresh air down the rear of the wagon and divert the exhaust from entering the rear window. With a pop-up rear window though, this isn't possible.
Any aerodynamics experts out there with any thoughts?
Doesn't the TLC use sliding glass in the rear quarter windows? I like that idea, but they'd have to relocate the integrated glass antenna on the driver's side. Or only have it slide on the passenger's side.
They can relocate the antenna to the rear window. But since some people said the integrated antenna has a bad reception they should just make it a regular retracting antenna.
Yep it's in the rear quarter windows they slide, same on the montero. This was on the last generation of the TLC and Monteros, not sure if the current ones do that.
I do not think it is carbon monoxide issue, as most van and some SUV has the rear window pop out type. The Toyota Siena, Venture.... van has elect. pop out. The MB ML320, if you opt. for 3rd seat, it comes with electrical pop out rear window. I think it is more of a cost/design to due with the sound/wind insulation problem and the electrical motor to open it.
One of the reasons I would consider the 8 passenger Pilot over the 7 passenger Ody is because you can seat 3 passengers in the second row, fold down the third row seat, and have a good sized cargo area. When you flip and fold the 3rd row seat in the Odyssey you get a cavernous cargo area but you can only carry 4 passengers. The ability to carry 5 passengers plus cargo and have the option to seat up to 3 more passengers when not carrying lots of cargo makes the Pilot very appealing.
I think that's Honda's theory too. However, in real life, if you need to carry that much cargo, more than likely you are going on a trip. And I would hate to be the guy who has to sit in the middle position of the 2nd row. So I figure instead of having an extra seat that no one will want to sit in for any length of time, why not eliminate it and probably end up overall with a more useful configuration? Someone mentioned that's how the Odyssey is configured. And right he is. But then again, is the Pilot not just a raised, AWD Odyssey for all intents and purposes?
what i meant was if additional options or color/ interior options be available, such as heated seats, or saddle with more colors etc. even moonroof, other manufactures have done that, 3-6 monts after intro new options come out.
You could remove the middle seats and use that area for cargo
I had this discussion with a friend of mine -- How would the cargo be secured? Won't the cargo become projectiles in the event of a crash? At least, in the Pilot, if equipped with the cargo cover and cargo net, the cargo would not necessarily launch itself? The cargo cover and cargo net may not necessarily prevent the cargo from being projectiles but it would at least minimize the chances of the cargo being so. JMO.
I don't know if I ever recall a Honda adding options like heated seats or a moonroof during the first model year. Varmint might have a better memory for this kind of thing. I sure wouldn't bet on the Pilot getting options like heated seats or a moonroof during the first model year.
Honda has already announced some Pilot colors that are not available upon initial launch, so I would assume that would take care of color options for the first model year.
For you engineering types try this experiment on your Pilot while driving at highway speeds (60+ mph). First, make sure all 4 windows are closed tight. Then lower one of the back windows all the way down. The result will be a display of air "waves" that are trapped in the vehicle and resonate off of the remaining closed windows that will cause discomfort and even some slight pain in one's ear due to the pressure increase. Never seen anything like this before in any other vehicle. Obviously as soon as any of the other 3 windows are opened the tiniest amount, the pressure drops and the discomfort or pain are gone, and all you have left is the increased noise. Just for kicks try it and see what happens.
It always comes down to your priorities and which you're willing to pay for. Some will find the Pilot's safety more than adequate, some will find it overkill, and some will really want it to have VSA and other features.
After all, a lot of folks buy Highlanders without side airbags (or Camrys without side airbags for that matter).
The Pilot should do very well in the crash tests. Honda/Acura does extensive internal crash testing, and so far has accurately predicted the IIHS and NHTSA crash test results for its recent vehicles. They've made a similar high claim for the Pilot, and I have little doubt they'll meet it. Though folks who want to be absolutely sure may want to wait. Up to them.
I'm curious to see if the Pilot has the same small fishtail in emergency handling that the MDX has (revealed in tests by Motor Week and Consumer Reports). Not a real problem on a dry road, but could be worse on a wet one.
Regarding the post about the MDX having one -- two of the MDX's most direct competitors (at least according to Acura), don't have it either (RX300 and ML320). Doesn't seem to be hurting MDX sales, what incentive does Acura have in adding one? It certainly isn't deterring buyers.
It may make more sense to have one in the Pilot, given its competitive space. Just out of curiousity, does the Highlander have a rear window that opens separately from the hatch? Obviously the Explorer does.
Before you knock the Pilot's rear door lack of window operation, operate the rear hatch! I believe the reason the Pilot does not have an operational window is to reduce weight in the liftgate. The Pilot liftgate is easier and more comfortable to operate than any other SUV I have encountered. As far as the window latch, I only used it during my 10 years ownership of Explorer products when I had a bike on the back of the car and was too lazy to reach through the back seat to get something, in the big scheme of things rarely. The idea that I don't have to worry about tearing my suit jacket while trying to heave closed the liftgate on a daily basis is a certain plus for me:)
The Ford Explorers I have driven produce the same intolerable "rumble" effect with one or both back windows down and front windows up. I somewhat thought the same thing could be present in a lot of the SUVs. Can't run like that for any length of time, it really gets on your nerves.
It's funny to me that Honda's Pilot researchers would conclude that the split gate idea isn't worth it, but the CR-V researchers think it's the bee's knees. <<shrug>>
I haven't seen Honda do many content related changes in the 2nd model year. Typically changes like that are designs that weren't completed in time for production. I suspect that was the case with the Insight CVT model.
Yes, Pilot should have this. As part of Honda's market demographics the Pilots will be at Home Depot and might need to hang longer items out an open rear hatch window. Their MDX demographics would say that those folks will call a contractor! But seriously, I think Honda saw that those windows were not used that much and took the opportunity to cut costs and improve their bottom line. Along similar lines, a friend of mine with a 4runner told me he could never live without the power rear window it had. Not having ever having one, I could not see the need.
After one day of driving my new Pilot, I decided the Goodyear Integrity tires were not up to snuff. Way too soft and mushy, with very soft sidewalls. I switched them for a new Bridgestone tire that just came out-245/70/16 Dueler HP D680. Immediately noticeable is a more MDX like ride, which kind of confirms my thinking that the ride quality of the Pilot (that is softer) is more due to the choice of tire by Honda rather than significant suspension differences between the Pilot & MDX. Aside from the significant handling and ride differences these new tires have provided, their moderately larger size profile fill the large wheelwell area in the Pilot so much more aesthetically than the standard Goodyear.
CRV having a split window has nothing to do with Honda demographic or research. Rather, it is related to the spare tire on the rear door. Have you ever seen a full liftgate with a spare tire mounted on it? I bet if Honda could have found room for the spare under the chassis, the window would not have been split.
"Never mind a rear window that opens, but aren't you all a little upset that you can't even open the rear hatch with the key fob remote?"
bodydouble, I used to own a Blazer that had a button on the remote to pop open the back glass--it was the biggest pain ever. It was always getting popped inadvertantly and I would have to get out, trudge around back and shut it. No way would I want a liftgate to come open like that. Maybe it was a GM remote issue, but Honda remotes aren't perfect either...the panic button on my husband's '01 Accord has a hair trigger! (which is funny because it's really hard to press the button again to shut the darn thing off!)
Certainly, I'll miss not having a rear glass that opens the few times I haul lengthy stuff, but to be honest I prefer to open the liftgate--the openings on most back windows are not deep enough anyway for me to reach into effectively or without getting dirty.
FYI to whoever cares!--both our Jeep and Accord do the "air pressure/turbulence thing" when the windows are opened in certain configs.
and oh yeah, I get my Black EX this weekend!!! Yippee!
Comments
pchiu - the leather in my '99 volvo was probably "nicer" - thicker & softer, as you mentioned. but the pilot leather isn't such that i was struck by the low quality. with a 2-yo & another child on the way, i'm more concerned with durability/ability to withstand spills than with "luxury."
As for new model - if history repeats itself, Honda will offer a moonroof in the next gen Pilot (2008 model) just like they started to offer it in the 2nd gen CRV.
It is quite common that a new model will rush out without some features,to set a low price, then later when they see the demand they will put the opinions in, as a package or as 'Special Edition'.
But they may also want to distance Pilot from MDX in terms of options that you can get.
But you never know when they will put in new option, maybe very quick or may not happen ever.
That is why I quote the CR-V real case.
No rattles, squeaks or flaws that I have found (have 700 miles on it).
I will admit that the leather is no where near as thick as on our 2002 Passat, but I have no issues with it either.
I was quoted $1,095 by my dealer for the Honda Care 7yr/100k. They also said that I have two years to buy it. I plan on waiting to see how the vehicle shakes out reliability wise. Then I'll decide to either plop down for the warranty or sell it after the 3/36 expires.
Thanks for the feedback on HondaCare...I am picking up my new Pilot EX tonight and I will hold off on adding this ext.warranty coverage...Hope that my initial Pilot experience is as good as yours!
Why does this matter?
Since inception (in 1996), the CR-V has had a moonroof. It's a JDM style moonroof, which the US buyers would probably frown upon. It's positioned behind the driver's head and is more or less for the rear seat occupants.
Rumor has it, in order to keep a stiff roof structure, Honda put a structural support right through the area where the US style moonroof would fit. That's supposed to be the reason why Honda didn't offer a moonroof until the vehicle was completely re designed for 2002.
What does this have to do with the Pilot?
The Pilot was designed specifically for the NA market. Unlike the CR-V, I doubt that there is a significant engineering reason for the lack of a moonroof. It is much more likely that the reasoning is purely to defend the MDX from too much in-house competition. When the Acura has more content to fend off comparison with it's little brother, the Pilot will most likely get a moonroof option.
Imagine the Pilot stretched by a few inches...legroom in the 3rd row would be more accomodating. It may still not seat an adult, but the critics won't be able to complain about a lack of legroom back there.
The Odyssey's bucket-to-bench seats could've been applied to the Pilot as an option (especially on the EX if that middle seat is really as worthless as some here say).
It's still a fine vehicle, but it won't redefine the segment as much as the Odyssey did.
Honda already has done it. At least something close. The vehicle is called the Odyssey. ;-)
The Pilot is an early-intro 2003 model. I think the chances are virtually zero that they would have a 2003.5 refresh on a brand new model! It's not like the vehicle is not moving off the lots at all, judging from all the folks paying MSRP or above MSRP.
Honda (and quite a few automakers) does not react that quickly in model year refreshes. Sometimes Honda waits quite a while, beyond what some of its more impatient fans want. Sometimes it's quite prudent.
If Honda was really timely, the MDX would have been updated before the Pilot launch. The MDX would have already had stability control (heck, the Pilot should have stability control). Their stability control system would be full-range like the German vehicles, unlike Acura's VSA and Toyota's VSC. The MDX and Pilot would have Brake Assist. Their vehicles in general would have side curtain airbags or some kind of head protection. You'd be able to get not only xenons but bi-xenons. I'll bet the 2003 MDX does not have all the features some folks are dreaming up for it. It'd cost as much as an ML320 then and Acura won't price it that high.
So no, you're not going to see a 2003.5 refresh!
They are both good vehicles, but the Honda is a bit expensive for what you get IMHO. We almost got an Envoy, but my wife liked the Bravada interior better. I think these trucks had a few issues when they came out but they seem to be mostly resolved now.
Good luck with the shopping.
The Toyoto Highlander will be (roughly) $46,000 if loaded with all these safety features, with the highest trim. I just need the 3rd seat.
The MB Ml320, the lower model with cloth saets (Canadina only)will have every safety features. Selling $50,000 add $1,300 for the cloth 3rd seat. This sounds good, but by the time I checked (early June 2002), they do not have 3rd seat ML320 available in Toronto. As production of 2002 has ended, they are producting 2003. They say may locate out of Totonto, but I do not think I can negotiate the price for a year end model if not from Toronto.
The Volvo XC90 coming in Nov 2002, will be $55,000.
So the final decision is to get the Pilot now, for the 3rd seat 8 passengers.
At least I switch from a sedan to a higher SUV, to due with the concern that so many SUVs out there will cause more damage to my family in a sedan.
The Honda claims the Pilot has a 'clip' in the front to due with the problem of causing more damage to other sedans. So does the MB and Volvo, not sure about Toyota.
As I do not want these things happen to other family too.
I reply, I cannot, it is a fix window.
Hope the rear A/C will really help.
I think a better solution would be to have a small moonroof back there for ventilation. Nothing big or fancy, perhaps just a small 17 inch hole in the roof that opens up. If Honda can put it in the Element SUV, there's no reason why they can't do it with the MDX (especially the MDX).
-mike
I know that in my CR-V, when I am carrying long items in the back and have the rear window open while driving, I can smell the exhaust coming in from the rear. I open all the front windows and crank the vents to make sure the air is fresh up front. But since there is no third row in the CR-V, they can get away with the pop-up window.
I remember that old-time station wagons (we called 'em "beach wagons" hehe) with third-row seats and rear windows that would slide down into the tailgate, sometimes had spoilers on the roof above to deflect fresh air down the rear of the wagon and divert the exhaust from entering the rear window. With a pop-up rear window though, this isn't possible.
Any aerodynamics experts out there with any thoughts?
-mike
The Toyota Siena, Venture.... van has elect. pop out.
The MB ML320, if you opt. for 3rd seat, it comes with electrical pop out rear window.
I think it is more of a cost/design to due with the sound/wind insulation problem and the electrical motor to open it.
manufactures have done that, 3-6 monts after intro new options come out.
I had this discussion with a friend of mine -- How would the cargo be secured? Won't the cargo become projectiles in the event of a crash? At least, in the Pilot, if equipped with the cargo cover and cargo net, the cargo would not necessarily launch itself? The cargo cover and cargo net may not necessarily prevent the cargo from being projectiles but it would at least minimize the chances of the cargo being so. JMO.
Honda has already announced some Pilot colors that are not available upon initial launch, so I would assume that would take care of color options for the first model year.
After all, a lot of folks buy Highlanders without side airbags (or Camrys without side airbags for that matter).
The Pilot should do very well in the crash tests. Honda/Acura does extensive internal crash testing, and so far has accurately predicted the IIHS and NHTSA crash test results for its recent vehicles. They've made a similar high claim for the Pilot, and I have little doubt they'll meet it. Though folks who want to be absolutely sure may want to wait. Up to them.
I'm curious to see if the Pilot has the same small fishtail in emergency handling that the MDX has (revealed in tests by Motor Week and Consumer Reports). Not a real problem on a dry road, but could be worse on a wet one.
It may make more sense to have one in the Pilot, given its competitive space. Just out of curiousity, does the Highlander have a rear window that opens separately from the hatch? Obviously the Explorer does.
I haven't seen Honda do many content related changes in the 2nd model year. Typically changes like that are designs that weren't completed in time for production. I suspect that was the case with the Insight CVT model.
Pilot & MDX. Aside from the significant handling and ride differences these new tires have provided, their moderately larger size profile fill the large wheelwell area in the Pilot so much more aesthetically than the standard Goodyear.
bodydouble, I used to own a Blazer that had a button on the remote to pop open the back glass--it was the biggest pain ever. It was always getting popped inadvertantly and I would have to get out, trudge around back and shut it. No way would I want a liftgate to come open like that. Maybe it was a GM remote issue, but Honda remotes aren't perfect either...the panic button on my husband's '01 Accord has a hair trigger! (which is funny because it's really hard to press the button again to shut the darn thing off!)
Certainly, I'll miss not having a rear glass that opens the few times I haul lengthy stuff, but to be honest I prefer to open the liftgate--the openings on most back windows are not deep enough anyway for me to reach into effectively or without getting dirty.
FYI to whoever cares!--both our Jeep and Accord do the "air pressure/turbulence thing" when the windows are opened in certain configs.
and oh yeah, I get my Black EX this weekend!!! Yippee!