Honda Ridgeline SUT

rsholland

Your hero trucks (ridge & baja) can't pull a boat or camper let alone plow snow.

I don't have a boat or camper, so I could care less about that. As to snow, my so-called "hero" trucks just drive right through snow.

I guess in your opinion it makes more sense to spend $31k plus for a ridge
then purchase a utility trailer to do the hauling huh?

Nope tow my trailer with an SUV. I have no need for a pickup.

Bob

rsholland

Oh, there's no question about that. Just look at his long history of posting here (and elsewhere, BTW). The bulk of it by far is directed at me.

Bob

robr2

Let's just use the "Ignore" button. No attention = goes away.

rsholland

notice how he conveniently avoids any comparisons of the Ridgeline with the mid-size Chevy Colorado, which is a much closer comparison than the 3/4-ton Chevy he owns? Oh well...

Bob

rsholland

Good idea. I vote for that.

Bob

geo9

Seems the honda faithful has compared the ridge to just about any other
1/2 ton "truck" out there as well as the avalance and the sport trac.

The general opinion has been the ridge out shines them all.........

Around here just mention the ridges shortcomings and prepare for the
fallout................... :lemon:

qbrozen

I haven't seen any updates on mileage in a while. How are you owners making out? Any improvements with time?

Also, i don't know if anyone is here in the NE, but we've had rain all week. Does that trunk stay nice and dry all the time?

explorerx4

i wonder if there are any 'ridge owners here in the NE. I have only ever seen 3 on the road; a red, a white and a silver. i do see them at the local honda dealer.

gd113

I have 8k on my Ridge and I am getting 17mpg city and 21-22 highway. I'm not a light foot either. I am in CT with all the rain, truck and interior bone dry.

trashington

I just filled up and this past tank I got about 16.5 mpg with mostly city like driving, my commute to work is only 4 miles and reaches a top speed of 45 mph. I also only have 2400 miles on my truck.
I'm in the Baltimore-DC area and we have also been getting a ton of rain this past week and I have had no leaks in my trunk or anywhere else on the truck.
I do plan on using it next week for tailgating for the first time at the MD football game and can't wait to use the trunk as an ice box! Anybody else out there use the trunk as a cooler yet?

wooddorker

As of the end of Sept. '05, still only 25k sold:



With 3,300 sold in Sept. sales are down compared with the summer months.

Think it's the market? Toyota sold 21.4% more Tacomas, Dodge sold 7% more Dakotas, and Nissan sold 9% more Frontiers, in 09/05 vs. 09/04.

qbrozen

As of the end of Sept. '05, still only 25k sold

All depends on perspective. For instance, if I consider the WRX in its first year, it was scheduled for, if I recall correctly 15K (or was it 18K) units to be sold in the US. It was a HUGE success and, consequently, production for that first year was bumped up to 22K units. So... 22K units = HUGE success for a company like Subaru. Admitedly, 25K for HONDA is much less than many of its other vehicles, but its still more than LOTS of other niche vehicles out there ... and they've still got about 10 months of '06 sales to go!

gd113

I believe Honda said that they expected to sell 50k annually. It's been on sale since March so they maybe a little under. Gas prices haven't helped. All those names mentioned are all resigned for this year so competition is tough. The Ridge is a niche truck tough. Ford sold 70k F series last month alone, although down 30% from previous year. By their own admission Honda is not taking on the pickup market just filling a hole.

kermit777

I traded in my 03 s-10 crew cab 4x4 in august for an RTS. I have never owned or considered owning a Honda (except an 86 vfr 700). However, my interest was peaked my Car and Driver and Consumer Reports in the spring. I mulled it over and decided to take a look and go for a test drive. I bought it for about $26,000 due to some patience on my end, some severe haggling on my trade in value, and some financing miracles. The salesperson also bought my wife and I Dunkin Donuts coffee while out on the test drive and pizza for lunch. No problems so far. Average per tank is getting up to a hair under 20 mpg. I've owned an 88 Toyota 4x4 p/u(couldn't kill it), 91 ford bronco(oops, that was a mistake), 94 extended cab ranger 4x4(so-so), 01 f-150 2wd regular cab(no problems except only "features" it had were 4 wheel ABS and "hose-out" floors. mainly got this because my wife was out of work and had to reduce my car payment), and my s-10. Out of all of those, this has been the one that most met my functional needs and has had the best ride. My s-10 had a 4.3L 6cyl that had 190hp that I averaged 17 mpg with. The Ridgeline has a 3.5L 6 cyl with ~245 hp that I am now averaging ~20mpg with. Makes me sad the GM supplier pricing plus $4000 rebate enticed me to get the New Jersey built hunk of problems that was my s-10. How does an engine 80% the size of my s-10 have 130% of the horsepower and get ~15% better mileage (that's a good thing by the way)? I'm just amazed by how much better my Ridgeline is in comparison. My s-10 went back to the dealer 6 times in 2 years for repair. 2nd week of ownership I had it in because it made a grinding noise taking left turns uphill, passenger window did not shut at highway speeds, and the rear suspension was squeaky (they never could fix the later two, but at least the passenger window could be shut if drivers window was opened). Later problems included rear passenger window motor burning out, glove box latch failed in cold weather, two coolant leaks, a warped thermostat housing, and the switch for ventilation mode stuck in Vent mode and leaked transmission fluid into my ashtray and console (I guess the vacuum line gets routed through the transfer case with the 4x4 selector switch). The ride/handling sucked, if I hit a pothole or road abnormality while turning, the wheels would lose contact with the road causing the truck to border on the edge of control. The floor had odd lumps consuming the passenger compartment to allow the drive train to be carelessly crammed underneath. I thoroughly enjoy the AWD of the Ridgeline. Living in a rather busy town pulling out of side streets or just plain taking off in wet weather almost surely meant losing rear traction with the s-10, but with the Ridgeline there is no problem. Sorry for the rant about the s-10, it's just now that I have had my Ridgeline for 2 months I get angry thinking about how I put up with the s-10 at all. Glad to be able to sleep better at night now, lol. :P

varmint

Sounds like you're the sort of owner the Ridgeline was built for.

colonelpanic

Kermit. Just curious. When you "haggled" for the trade-in price what were you using as a guage? Edmunds Trade-In Value? KBB? If so how close to it was the final offer?

once_for_all

What does Honda have up its sleeve for the Ridgeline?

http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/News/articleId=107579

If anything, I would have thought the current engine was already maxed out for HP and torque.

Perhaps they will be doing appearance kits?

John

qbrozen

maxed out? what makes you say that?

What about the 300hp 3.5 in the RL?

once_for_all

well, it is easy enough to jack up the hp at high rpms (Honda is famous for this) and sacrifice driveability, torque and economy at the low end.

You can't get more without sacrificing something. The Ridgeline engine is set up for making good low end torque and hitting peak hp at reasonable rpm's (255 hp at 5750rpm, and 252 ft-lbs at 4500). The RL's engine is 300 hp at 6200 rpms, and 260 ft-lbs of torque at 5000 rpm.

For towing and everyday driveability, the Ridgeline's engine is superior.

If you want to burn up the highway, the Acura's engine is more interesting.

Reading Edmund's first drive for the RL, their only criticism is the lack of low end torque that makes the competition's V-8 more desireable.

John

qbrozen

I disagree. With the ADDED torque and almost 20% more HP, to boot, that 500 rpm difference in peak torque would be more than made up for. Therefore the RL's engine would be an improvement in the Ridgeline and Pilot.

By the way, I never had any problem outaccelerating most SUVs on the road with our Pilot (and we only had the 240 hp version).

In addition, if Nissan can make 287hp/274ft-lbs 3.5 liter, certainly Honda can, too.

once_for_all

the rpm/torque curve is the entire key to driveability.

Who cares if you can get 300 hp at 6,000 rpm? It isn't an acceleration game out there. This is coming from a guy who loved Honda motorcycles because they sounded so sweet at 9,000 rpm. But give me a grunt Harley with low end torque for normal driving.

Also note, it isn't the RL's torque at 5200 rpm vs the Ridgeline at 4700. It is the Ridgeline torque at 2,000 rpm vs the RL's torque at 2,000 rpm. That is the point that the Edmund's reviewers were making regarding a V-6 vs a V-8. And they get paid $ for making their points. I don't get a red nickel.

John

varmint

Honda has sent out several Civic Si pre-production cars to various tuners. One of which is the well-known TOV website. They are each charged with tuning the car to their own tastes and showing it at SEMA.

Anyway, what we might see is something like a Mugen Ridgeline and not a Honda-produced concept, at all. And Mugen has a race-bred V8, which they've already shoved under the hood of the Acura RL in the past.

rsholland

of "4Wheel & Off-Road" magazine has stated that Honda is putting forth a Baja 1000 race truck. Reportedly will not be an all out purpose-built off-road racer, but rather it will be entered in a class that races mostly stock vehicles. Yes, the suspension will be beefed up and it will run 32" tires, the modifications will be pretty much limited to those sorts of things.

Bob

mrjjgittes

I've been looking at double cab Tacomas and Frontiers. Thought I'd also give the Ridgeline a look. At first I didn't like the exterior, but it has kind of grown on me. When I drove it, I noticed that it felt much larger inside than the tacoma and the frontier. Much more like a full size pickup. This was a good feeling for me since I have always been concerned about packing myself and a couple of my bigger friends into a Taco (even the new one) for a weekend fishing trip. The under bed trunk was great. It drove very well too. Overall, I am not sure I am sold yet, but it seems like the only negative is a bit less offroad ability since no 4 wheel low, and a bit less towing capacity. The towing is not a deal breaker for me since I can't imagine wanting to tow more than 5000# with any of them. For off roading, I am also not sure that I would subject any of these $25-30k vehicles to very much. I'd still like to see the price come down another couple thousand on the RTS, which is what I'd probably get. It is a nice and extremely well rounded vehicle though.

qbrozen

can you show me the maps of both engines' powerbands for comparison? I most definitely would like to see the torque of both at 2k.

it isn't an acceleration game out there

then just what are you getting at? low-end torque is all about acceleration. We already know the V8 frame-based trucks can tow more. That has alot more to do with the vehicle's structure, tranny, and differential, then it does the engine (old gas-power Dodge Powerstrokes are 6-bangers and can pull a house down). so what more are you looking to get out of putting an 8-cyl in the Ridge aside from acceleration?

once_for_all

not me, I don't want an 8 cylinder Ridge. I want one that gets 24mpg.

The Ridgeline brochure has the torque vs rpm map. I haven't seen one for the RL. But, like I said you can't get something for nothing, and the RL's 300 hp is achieved at the high rpm end range, and the torque curve is also shifted.

Low-end torque is not entirely acceleration. It is the ability of the engine to pull at or maintain a certain rpm (ideally, the one that is most efficient). In other words if you floored the engine at 2,000 rpm, something happens other than 3 downshifts to get the engine speed up to 6,000 rpm.

The benefit of high torque at low rpm is that you maintain high engine efficiency (low fuel consumption). When the engine has to race to develop power, it rapidly losses its efficiency.

it is one of the reasons a diesel engine is more efficient than gasoline.

John

qbrozen

my V8 sedan still downshifts 3 gears if I floor it. That's just the nature of an automatic, not necessarily anything to do with the torque available.

Now, in the same paragraph, you are saying you want torque to maintain speed, but you want it to take off when you floor it (acceleration). Neither of us have the maps to the RL, but I'm fairly confident we would find it is not very different from the Ridge in low-end torque, while providing higher HP.

Regardless, however, your point was the 3.5 is already maxxed and, I'm extrapolating, you feel the vehicle needs a bigger engine in regards to a "tuner" version. I think they can make the current one faster with the same engine. Heck, even the MDX has more power. It wouldn't be tough for Honda to cut the acceleration times down a bit for a "tuner" version.

tex8

I'm around the Hartford area. Seen a Blue in Vernon and another Silver in Manchester.

kermit777

I was going by KBB trade-in value where I rated my vehicle with its current condition

kermit777

forgot to add more detail. KBB trade-in value was reported to me as ~$13,000, the dealer gave me closer to $15,000 to make the deal work after initially offering me close to $10,000. It was the last sunday in August and they seemed eager to move some vehicles off the lot.

colonelpanic

kermit, thanks for the info. I was hoping to get close to the trade in value for my truck when I buy. It looks like you did even better. Good news.

rubyred1

I too own the Ridgeline. My choice was based on my needs. It is a very comfortable riding truck with plenty of sensible features. My only drawback is that when men see me driving, they look as though I'm out of my element.

As a woman, I like the design because it is not loaded down with all that unnecessary metal on the front grille.

By the way, why do most men choose size when most of the time they don't even use those large things for what they are intended? I guess it must be the "BIG" factor that turns them on.

I came out of the store not so long ago to find four men standing around and admiring my Ridgeline. As I approached, I asked one of the men if he wanted to take it for a spin. He accepted. Well, a couple of weeks later when I pulled up at the same store, he was the new owner of a Ridgeline.

rubyred1

Are you angry because the Ridgeline is not in your affordable price range? If it were, you'd probably be driving one.

georgekaplan

The Ridgeline will be getting the a new feature added to its engine next year. I forget the specifics but it is the same "VCM" feature that is found on the Odyssey. It's suppossed to help with fuel consumption while not sacrificing power.

George

qbrozen

interesting, but then that must mean they will be offering it with 2wd (because, not only does only the 2wd pilot now come with VCM, but I believe i read where Honda said it just won't work properly with AWD??).

duanessong

Yesterday I received a letter from Honda providing my 06 Ridgeline with an enhanced drivetrain warranty. Instead of the original 3yrs/36K miles, my Ridgeline is now covered for 5 years/ 60K miles. Call me a cynic, but why would Honda provide me with additional coverage two months AFTER my purchase? Are they being beat up in the marketplace by some drivetrain reliability issues? Matching some competitor's warranty? Any other owners receive this letter along with new owner's manuals?

robr2

Honda recently changed it's powertrain warranty for all it's models starting with the 2006's. Since you own an 06, you get the warranty.

once_for_all

but then that must mean they will be offering it with 2wd

probably not.

The rear drive engages through two electrically engaged clutch packs.

Simple matter to tell the computer something like: VCM only when in 5th gear; when VCM kicks in, rear drive clutch packs get no signal.

John

georgekaplan

Yes John, I think that's correct. Just as the Ridgeline 4WD feature currently "kicks in" when needed, the VCM feature will also "kick in" when put in applicable situations like the highway etc, ie in 5th gear.

BTW - I wonder when the '07's will roll out and if any other cosmetic changes will be added. Anyone...anyone.........Bueller.....anyone.

George

once_for_all

I think VCM is an excellent move on Honda's part, something like 24mpg highway would really distance their "mid" size pickup from the crowd (in every category, handling, AWD, safety, features, on and on).

John

qbrozen

If its that simple, why didn't they do that for the Pilot?

Its possible they wanted to save that as an "update," but I would think it silly (and more costly) that they are actually producing 2 different systems for the Pilot, when one would have sufficed.

once_for_all

don't know, I am not privvy to Honda's marketing discussions.

But there is definitely a concern about mpg amongst car buyers. Could it be that all Pilots will be getting VCM as an option also?

John

nowakj66

06 Pilot 2WD has VCM as an option so I assume we are talking about VCM on 4WD versions?

varmint

You're going to have to help me answer that one. The post to which you refer does not get into pricing very much. And I didn't express much anger in there.

I do have the finances to purchase a Ridgeline, but I will more likely be going with an MDX. I have two greyhounds which cannot be transported in the open bed of a truck. With an infant to transport, I cannot use the space in the cab for them.

When I have expressed concerns over the price of a Ridgeline, I have done so in comparison with what other trucks cost. Because other mid-size trucks are built on ladder frames they cost little to produce. Therefore the manufactures and dealers can discount them heavily to drop the price. Not so with the complex body of the Ridgeline. Of course, the Ridgeline benefits greatly from that body and is worth the cost, IMO. But that doesn't stop shoppers who only think with their wallets.

varmint

I think you have been misinformed.

robr2

With an infant to transport, I cannot use the space in the cab for them.

Congrats - you mentioned that a few months ago but I hadn't read anything. When was the big day?

georgekaplan

key word in your post varmint is "think"

anyway, whether its on a 2wd model or 4wd or both, doesn't matter. the ridgeline, as we all know by now, is not really for the "truck machos" out there, but more for folks who want a "truck experience" and don't really have aspirations to go off road too often if ever. that being said, the VCM fuel saving feature is an added selling point to the ridgeline's niche. for those like me who don't use a truck as a "work truck" that can pull 300,000 pounds etc but for eveyday activities, the added feature will further entice those in the target market to take the ridgeline plunge. and, personally, i think it's a good move.

george

georgekaplan

BTW this post does not confirm it, nothing online ever does until the auto maker releases it (which they haven't yet), but click here: http://auto.consumerguide.com/auto/new/reviews/full/index.cfm/id/38535/vehicle/2006-Honda-- Ridgeline/ and go down to the "News" section.

But anyway, just sharing some info I ran across. May be awhile before it can be confirmed online.

george

once_for_all

well, what you have said is different from what we thought the "official" plan was. I am not saying that you are wrong, only that several months ago, we were told that VCM wasn't going to happen for the Ridgeline because it is too heavy and not aerodynamic enough for VCM to show much if any mpg increase.

John

varmint

From the link...

"One possible exception is the fuel-saving VCM cylinder-deactivation system that's already used in the Odyssey minivan, which shares Ridgeline's basic V6."

Key word, "possible".

If you have other information from a source a little more credible than Consumer's Guide, by all means let us know. I understand if you don't have a link for it, but can you at least describe your source?

I ask because Gary Flint talked about VCM with the guys at TOV. Gary is the guy responsible for the development of the Ridgeline. He told them the aerodynamics of the Ridgeline would eliminate the effectiveness of VCM. 3 cylinders are insufficient to move the heft of the aerodynamically challenged Ridgeline. So, you'd have an engine that can switch from 6 to 3 cylinders, but only in theory. The conditions where that might actually happen would be so rare, it wouldn't make a difference in fuel economy.

Who ya gonna trust?