Actually, I would consider the Pilot in a little different class than the Highlander. The Pilot is significantly larger inside and out, and I see it as more of an alternative to a Tahoe or Sequoia, Landcruiser, or even Ford Expedition. In a sense, a downsized full sized SUV.
In the last few years I have downsized from a Suburban, to a Sequoia, and now the Pilot, and am happy to get 16-17mpg! (Instead of 11-12!)
Even the new RAV4 doesn't seem much smaller than the Highlander, and certainly not less functional. From what I've read, the new Highlander is supposed to get a little bigger, not smaller. And more radical looking, like an FX35/45 or Murano.
So far, we're quite happy with the Pilot. It's not perfect, but at $30k I don't expect it to be. Toyota's in general have a little better reliability, but Honda's reliability is nothing to sneeze at either. In the end, what clinched it is we needed occasional 8 passenger capacity.
They're both good comfortable crossover SUVs, just different. If you don't need the 8 passenger capacity, than the Highlander may be just fine.
I know they are only rumors, but everything I have heard is that the Highlander is being "upsized" to compete with the MDX/Pilot. The RAV4 is nearly as big as the existing Highlander. Do you think they will make the more expensive Highlander smaller? I doubt it. The MDX is basically remaing the same size but with a lower roofline. I think the dimensions of the new Highlander will be quite similar to the new MDX.
As to the suspension, personally I wish the Pilot would use the MDX "sportier" suspension (and maybe it will in the future given the MDX redesign).
I just want to ask you Pilot owners something that nobody has been mentioning about the suspension -- Did you guys notice how the wheels stick out when you put weight on the car such as luggage. The makes the tire tread uneven, and the car is basically driving on the side of the wheel. That suspension part is really bad, considering it's a 4WD suv and the tires stick out like that. I know the car overall is good, but has too many small flaws.(such as too many owners complaining about steering wheel vibrations = it really is a serious problem) I got rid of my Pilot, because for $30,000 the car should NOT have any problems)
I must say, that I used to be a Honda fan but lately, I've been very disapointed with them. As I said in other posts, I sent letters to Honda about the steering wheel vibrations and Honda is just playing dum. If the new Pilot/MDX have less problems I would like the car, but in my opinion, Honda is not strict enough on quality control as of now.
Never noticed this on ours. We have 80,000 miles and no abnormal tire wear. We replaced the Goodyear Integritys at 50k miles just because I did not like the soft sidewalls. We have 30k miles on the Michelin Crossterrains and expect at least 60k miles if we keep it that long. Never had any steering wheel vibrations either.
The Highlander on the other hand had Bridgestones that we replaced at 20k miles because they were below the wear bars. I don't know if it is the tires or the Highlander causing such quick wear.
I think there's a little more to suspension design than whether the wheels "stick out too much" when the car is loaded. The Pilot is softly sprung, but that's what it takes to get the relatively smooth ride.
AFAIK, there is nothing inherently wrong with the Pilot's suspension design nor are the designs of competing SUV's inherently better.
We've had our Pilot for 2 months now. I can't say enough good things about it. It may be an aging design, but it is rock-solid, the suspension is very smooth and well-balanced, and it handles extremely well. The engine/transmission is responsive and well matched. Sometimes a brand new design doesn't necessarily mean a better design and the Pilot is obviously of very sound design. Anyone who has a substance abuse problem should get one of these instead. Just driving it makes you feel so good!
A comment on wheel vibrations, try having the wheels balanced using the Hunter Roadforce GSP9700 balancing system, and make sure that the lug nuts are torqued to proper specification. Over torqued lug nuts can cause wheel distortion over time causing vibrations, and also brake disc warpage.
Back in the day, I owned a Ford(it hurts to admit that) with independent rear suspension. The suspension was loosely sprung, and any time a heavy load was put in the trunk, the rear tires would flare. Once I matured, I owned a couple of Acura Legends. Although this car also had independent rear suspension, the tires did not flare out as the Ford's did once there was a load in the trunk. It seems to me that the tightness of the suspension dictates the flaring of the rear tires. The Pilot must not be as tight as the Acuras. JMHO.
Well the new Highlanders are supposed to start at 27,000+ they supposedly got rid of the 4 cylinders and lower end models. So that puts it out of my price range. I stood near a 2006 Rav4 and old style Highlander they appear to be almost the same length. What Toyota seems to be doing is making the 2006 Rav4 the new Highlander entry level around 22,000. a few years ago that would have bought a low end Highlander. Saw pics of the next gen Highlander it looks like a station wagon. It's rather ugly looking to me. Its a shame if thats the finished product.
As far as the Pilot goes, I see you can get a current model for 24,000 which isn't too bad. But the MPG is too low in the current model. I've been reading many people are getting 16-17 MPG way too low compared to my heavy 2001 Sienna getting 21 MPG.
Comparing the Pilot to the Murano I just assumed the Pilot was bigger, maybe I am wrong there. I know 2 people that have Muranos I think you can get one for 26,000. They are getting 27 MPG as stated on their electronic fuel gauge, I think that is pretty good. If The new Pilot still gets 16-17 MPG it's off my list. But I have a feeling the new Pilot and Highlander will get better MPG then the current models reguardless of size. The Japanese companies are great at getting MPG. Just look at the Corolla, Camry, Civic and Accord for proof of that.
Just to compare, from the manufacturer's webpages. You can see that for the 3rd row, the Highlander & Pilot are about the same for legroom, but the Pilot is taller & wider, so there's a lot more headroom. The Pilot is almost 6" wider & 4" longer than the Highlander, so it can squeeze in 3 in row 3. It's only 2" taller but has 6" more headroom in the 3rd row.
For some people, the Highlander is just too small for their needs. I have a Freestyle, so I put in those specs too. For me, the Pilot didn't have enough space inside, even though it holds 8 versus 7 in my Freestyle (plus I only paid $25K). For legroom, there are 3" more in both the 2nd & 3rd rows in my Freestyle, and you can really notice the difference. Plus more cargo space behind the 3rd row. And it's a couple of inches shorter and narrower, so it fits into my garage better. But it is a foot longer than the Pilot, but that goes into the 6" more legroom and increased cargo space.
So while these vehicles can be compared, there are some definite space/size differences between them. Plus, after living with the Freestyle for over a year and 30K miles, I don't think I'd want to lose 3" of legroom in the 2nd & 3rd rows, nor the extra cargo space. Today, there's a huge blur between SUV, big station wagons, cross overs, but it's good there are the choices.
Hopefully I'll have the Freestyle for another 5 years and by then, the vehicle I'm hoping will be available will be an AWD Odyssey with a 2nd row 60/40 fold in the floor bench configuration 8 pass vehicle without sliding doors.
I think your a bit off on the weight of your SUVs. Compared on Edmunds, all AWD/4WD models along with EPA highway mpg (which you may or may not agree with)
I know the 3rd rows of the Highlander and Pilot are listed the same for legroom but I believe the Pilot is roomier. We needed occassional use of the 3rd row and discounted the Highlander b/c of it. Also, the 2nd row in the Pilot slides forward (probably 3-4 inches) so you have a bit of flexibility there.
You'll probably say statistics don't lie, but I've ridden in the 3rd rows of both the Pilot and Freestyle and there is no comparison--the Pilot is more comfortable. Also, get a tape measure out and you'll find the Freestyle is no more than 44 inches side to side, behind the 3rd row. The Pilot is 57 inches. I know which one would fit a set of golf clubs and which one wouldn't.
I have a 2006 Honda Pilot EX for several months. I started get static or choppy sound through the radio (with AM/FM/XM) whenever I hit a bump (or road roughness). My guess is the antennae connection..anyone else have have this problem and solve? How? Suggestions please??!! :sick:
57" wide for the Pilot behind the 3rd row? It's hard to believe that the Pilot, which is only 2" wider than the Freestyle on the outside is 13" wider inside. I think you meant 47" inside for the Pilot.
Plus I'm not sure where you had the position of the 2nd row when you were in the 3rd row, but if you slid up the 2nd row to get a few more inches in the 3rd row to get comfortable, then you did match the Freestyle in 3rd row legroom; however, then reduced the space of the 2nd row to 33" vs 41" in the Freestyle. And I could probably put 3 sets of golf clubs behind the 3rd row in the 21 cubic feet of space.
But it's just numbers like you said. The Freestyle is a foot longer than the Pilot, so it shouldn't be a big surprise that it does have more space inside, but if the Pilot has the space you need then that's all that matters.
I guess in fairness, I should have been comparing the Pilot with the Explorer, and not the Freestyle, since the Freestyle is more of a big station wagon and both the Pilot/Explorer are true SUVs. Plus the specs of the Explorer are more inline with the Pilot:
193.4/72.8/73.7 L/W/H 39.8/38.7/37.4 Head Room Rows 1/2/3 42.4/36.9/34.9 Leg Room Rows 1/2/3 83.7/43.9/13.6 Cargo behind rows 1/2/3
That being said, I'd much rather have a Pilot then an Explorer.
With a 7 pass vehicle, you can get as small as a Mazda5 or as big as a giant SUV. And there's a lot in between. If you need an SUV for off-road or towing, then you need a true SUV. If it's just for light passenger duties and only occasional 7 pass needs, then some of the smaller crossovers/big station wagons might be needed. If you use all three rows of seats all the time, but don't need AWD or off-road capability, then a minivan is for you.
But of course you can always compare any two vehicles, but I always start with the overall interior size needs, and try to find the smallest vehicle that meets my needs. I looked at the Pilot & Highlander & Freestyle, but for me the extra foot in lenth of the Freestyle was worth the added room. The other two didn't meet my needs. And being a little less wide helps me pull into my 8' wide garage door. For me, the Freestyle felt/drove more like a car then either of the other two, which again makes sense since it's based on the Ford 500.
And then there's the cost factor. I don't need to pay for power that I won't use, and style and "luxury" features are low on my list of priorities. If I could have bought the Pilot for $25K, then I may have considered it, but it would have been closer to $30K.
Something missing in the Pilot are rear ceiling A/C vents like in the Freestyle. The Pilot only has vents between the front seats, which are good for keeping the second row passenger's knees cold, but don't help with the 3rd row passengers, nor with second row passengers sitting in the sun to cool their top half. The Freestyle has the rear A/C vents like the Pilot between the front seats, but also has 4 separate ceiling vents above the 2nd & 3rd rows that can be adjusted in many directions. We've used them lots of times in the summer and I'd never buy a three row vehicle without them. And there's an extra 3rd row heating vent beyond the normal vents under the first row seats.
Long post, but then the Freestyle isn't as well known as the Pilot, so I though I'd explain some of its features.
Check out the rav4 front leg room. Of all these suvs i think it has the most.
WHen I quoted the MPG I took it from personal experience and what I read on the boards. Granted my sienna is a 2001 I get 21 MPG. I dont trust stickers or books for that info.
57" sounds about right. I'm going from memory since I don't ouwn one. But if I recall there was slightly more than 48" between the wheel wells when I measured during a test drive. So, just behind the wheels should be even more...
On the MPG, I feel really good about our 03 Tahoe then. 17mpg (50/50 mix) and 19+ on the highway. Of the 6 cars/trucks/SUVs I've owned I've always gotten the posted EPA MPG or slightly better. But as it says "your mileage may vary".
You list some good reasons for looking at the Freestyle but a 2WD LX Pilot can be had for $25K I believe and probably not much above that for AWD either. Heck, I paid less than 30 for my AWD EXL. And despite the lenght, the Pilot has similar cargo and passenger space (due to its 3" width advantage.
Good point about the vents but keep in mind that the Pilot has one of the best AC systems on the market. It doesn't have the top vents but I am not sure that's a biggie given how well the system operates as a whole. I have never has a problem getting the whole interior cooled quickly.
I'm not sure what "best AC systems on the market" really means? With any AC system you have cold air coming out of vents. You have a fan speed and air temperature. I'm sure that you can angle the 2nd row vents up, and aim the first row vents up at the ceiling and then put the fan on high to move the cool air to the back, but the bottom line is that cool air goes down, and four extra ceiling vents with cool air slowly drifting down is better than the first row vents trying to blow to the back, and the 2nd row vents trying to move the air up where you need it and not just at the knees. That's why the Odyssey and other minivans all have rear ceiling AC vents.
Also, passenger volume in cubic feet means less than then actual legroom for your legs. I'd rather have more legroom and less overall cubic feet. The combined 6" of extra leg room in the 2nd & 3rd rows is nice to have, as well as the cargo well behind the 3rd row.
I bought the Freestyle because it has more cargo space, more passenger space, better mpg, better climate control system, is quieter (quieter driving down the highway at 70Db vs 76Db driving at 70mph according to Edmunds road tests), and cost less for the same features then other similar vehicles. And in my opinion it drives more car-like than SUV-like, which my wife and I both like.
But people look at different aspects when buying a car, so what's important for one isn't as important for another. But it's something to talk about. But I better get out of here because this is a Pilot forum!
When you say 27 MPG for Murano I think that's an absolute best case given that EPA for highway is only 24. And people are certainly getting better than 16-17 on the Pilot on the highway - that sounds more like city or mixed. I definitely get over 20 on the highway at 80 mph.
Considering its about 61 inches wide in the second and 50 in the third row its not bad. It can also tow 7500+ lbs.
Given the Freestyle has 17.6 cubic feet and is 2 inches longer than a 03 Tahoe. It should have more space. Granted its less than 1 cubic foot. But once the seats are folded the Tahoe has 20 cubic feet more. Even the much Shorter Pilot has 3 cubic feet more.
Given the Freestyles lack of Utility in a 1000 lb towing its near worhless as a SUV. A 4 cyl. Subaru tows over twice that and gets 28 mpg. A 1000lb towing limit is more like a Civic. The Pilot is respectable at 4500lbs.
Can the freestyle have three 19" wide car seats in the second row? nope. With 3 little kids your required to use the third row because the booster seats don't fit.
How about a larger turning circle of 40 feet in the Freestyle compared to 38 for both the Pilot and Tahoe.
All the other companies have figured out that there are more letters to the alphabet than "E" and "F" for model names. :P
glad to get opinions and information from all perspectives. And different choices are great for different needs/wants. Personally I love the width of the Pilot as it really allows 3 people to sit comforably in the 2nd row. Simply a better experience (more shoulder and hip room) as compared with the Highlander and probably the freestyle (but as you say, more legroom in the freestyle). Heck, I can fit 3 kids in seats in the 2nd row and that's a huge consideration for me (but not everyone). Also, I didn't want the length of a minivan for parking and my garage but that's just my individual preference.
When I say "one of the best AC systems" I mean that the Pilot has two compressors and really pumps out the cold air (it cools this large space more quickly than any vehicle I have owned) - not sure of the exact BTUs but it's high. I view the AC system of the Pilot as a stregth not a weakness. Compressor size might be a bigger consideration for some vs. overhead vents. Ideally, it would have both.
But you are right, based on features, utility and ride, people should at least look at the freestyle.
I'm not sure where you get your numbers, but according to the Chevy & Edmunds webpages, the L/H/W of the current Tahoe is 202/77/79, which is 2” longer, 8” higher and 5” wider than the Freestyle, yet has 5 less cubic feet of cargo space behind the 3rd row (the Freestyle has 20.8...see Ford webpage and Automobile Mag gives is 22.5, I don't know why Edmunds only reports 17.6), 2” less legroom in the 2nd row, and 8” less legroom in the 3rd row. That’s why I made the comment about the inefficient interior space for the size of the exterior. And the Freestyle gets 33% better city and 29% better hwy mileage, and starts for $25K vs $38K for the Tahoe...but the Tahoe can tow 7500+lbs, so if towing is the priority then go for it.
You're correct about the Freestyle towing. The Freestyle can't tow much. But since I've never had the need to tow anything, nor do I forsee the need to ever tow anything, a vehicle could be capable of towing 10,000lbs and it's meaningless to me. Similarly, the Freestyle's 5% larger turning circle you mentioned doesn't seem to have much impact on day to day use.
What does have an impact on my everyday driving are things like handling, low interior noise levels, trunk space, and passenger space. These are the areas that matter on a daily basis, which is why I mentioned them in my previous posts.
And by the way I've had a baby seat and two booster seats in the 2nd row, when my wife and her friend went to the zoo together with our 9 month daughter, and her 3 and 6 year old kids, and although it was a little tight in the 2nd row with all three carseats, they all fit. And no, I don't know if they were all 19" wide carseats.
But this is a Pilot forum, and if I needed to tow, then I'd buy the Pilot over the Freestyle in a second. And if I needed to carry three across in the second row all the time, then I probably wouldn't buy a Freestyle either, but I'd probably buy a minivan at that point, because even if you can fit three car & booster seats in the second row, I really wouldn't want to do that on long road trips.
There's only one way I can say this--get the tape measure out. The PILOT is 57 inches behind the 3rd row. Now I realize there is no depth to that space, but then, there is no depth behind the 3rd row of your Freestyle, or an Explorer, or, worst of all, a Jeep Commander, etc...and that rest of the Pilot cargo area, with the 3rd row down, is not as wide as that, but the specific area I'm talking about---behind the 3rd row---is 57 inches.
Thanks for helping me make my point. When I said "no depth" behind the 3rd rows of these vehicles, I was speaking relatively--not literally. Obviously there is "some" depth behind all of them, but not much. You're not going to pack much in that "foot" of space behind the 3rd row of your Freestyle, especially as narrow as it is. Nor will anyone pack much behind the 3rd row of the Pilot. BUT, the Pilot will pack MORE because it still has more depth than that "foot" of space in the Freestyle, and, as I said earlier, is over "a foot" wider than it.
Maybe the confusion is width (left to right) versus depth (up and down). In the Pilot, the load floor is level with the bottom of the back hatch opening with the 3row of seats up. And it has 15.9 cubic feet of luggage space behind the third row. In the Freestyle with the 3rd row seats up, there is luggage space below the bottom point of the hatch opening (like in minivans), which allows for a total of 20.8 cubic feet of storage behind the 3rd row (and you can even slide some stuff below the 3rd row of seats). Yes the area behind the 3rd row of the Pilot is wider, but there is still less overall cubic feet of storage space, which is why they use the cubic feet measurement to compare trunk/cargo space.
I used numbers from an 03 tahoe since that's what we have. The 07's have grown by 4 inches.
Glad your freestyle works for you. If it could tow 4000 lbs I'd probably consider one. If mini-vans could tow just a touch more I might consider one. Then again the difference between 19mpg and 24mpg on the highway is only what $200 or $300 for the year?
Only thing that kept us from a Pilot was, first year model (when we purchased), poor sales person, first year price, and how close dealships were. 30 miles vs 1 mile. The Pilot itself fit our needs and we liked it.
Just bought a 06' and can't believe this thing doesn't have automatic headlights ! My refrigerator even has an automatic night light. It's been 7 or 8 years since I have had to actually turn a cars headlights on.
In a way, the pilot does have psuedo automatic headlights. If you leave them ON all the time, they will turn off automatically when you remove the key. So, you do not have to EVER mess with the headlights. They will also be on during the day though, so you will have DAY LIGHT RUNNING LAMPS.
Okay, I am trying to decide on whether to buy a Pilot or Odyessy. I have 3 kids who are 12 years old and under and a yellow lab that we sometimes, (but certinaly not at all times) take with us to the snow/beach here in California. Right now I have a Yukon SUV that has been so much trouble that I am just not going to keep it any longer or my husband might take it. I realize that the pilot is a SUV too but should be better than the city gas mileage I get with GMC of 10 mpg. I had a Odyessy years ago, and it was okay but not as comfy for my back, I do have back issues. I tried the 06 Odyessy and Pilot, the newer Odyessy is definately better than the older one but still not great. The pilot for my back is better but I am concerened about whether there is enough room in the Pilot for my family. I would love to, hear from other people who have Pilot and kids. I do carpool at times, the AWD would come in handy when we go to Lake Tahoe in winter. Thx ahead of time.
3 kids, I think you need the Odyessy. If you plan on hauling anything at all you really won't have the room in the Pilot after loading the kids. I also think the Van gets better gas mileage but I might be wrong. Isn't the pilot being redesigned after this year. It may be bigger and nicer if you wait.
My mom has the Van and it has a ton of room and drives nice.
If you are doing fine with the Yukon and your kids you'll do fine with the Pilot. Your kids are still young. Our kids are the same ages and the Pilot has been great, but I suspect I'll need a Suburban or Minivan in a few years when they (and their friends) get a lot bigger!
But I agree that the Odyssey is a much better people and cargo hauler than the Pilot- but no AWD to go to Tahoe.
I will say since the Pilot is significantly shorter than the Odyssey it's more maneuverable and easier to park if you live in a more urban environement.
I had the Honda Odyssey for five years and loved it. I had two kids in high school with lots of friends and there was always lots of space. The well in the back was great for supermarket bags, and it got great gas mileage too (much better than the Pilot). I am about to buy the Honda CR-V for my daughter to take up to college - has great safety features and AWD. If you really need 4 WD or AWD, the Toyota Minivan has it. My friend has that one. I have been in it and personally prefer the Honda Odyssey, but both are nice.
The gas mileage thing is interesting. I would say the Ody has a definite MPG advantage on the highway over the Pilot but around town the numbers will be quite similar so it might depend on the type of driving that you do. No doubt the Ody has more space and is easier to enter/exit but I prefer the dimensions of the Pilot and the outward vision for parking and more congested driving. It's a mixed bag.
I went to the dealer to buy a Honda Pilot for my wife and I to travel in..we are empty nesters. I test drove the Pilot and on a whim, I drove the Odyssey. Really found the Odyssey to be smoother with easier more carlike handling, more quiet on the highway and more comfortable for my bad back. I bought the Odyssey even though the AWD and smaller size of the Pilot was what I preferred...just really found the Odyssey to be more comfortable and had better gas mileage. Both are good reliable cars with a lot going for them. My daughter has the older Odyssey and the new one is much more refined.
We are looking at the Pilot. It sure looks to be a real nice car and the prices are fairly reasonable. The question I have is about the rear seat. We have teens who we take skiing which is about four hours away. I have an all-wheel drive Town and Country which we use now. Often one person has to sit in the third row. It works. Is this possible to use the third row seat in such a manner. It really looks almost unusable. Am I wrong?
My opinion is that it is not a comfortable, or safe seat to use. (Many will disagree though) I would recommend an AWD Sienna because it has a high ground clearance, and AWD. Think about it. What do you think?
Hey I am looking into buying a new SUV to replace my 04 Honda Accord. The Accord has been great, but I would like to change things up and buy a small/midsize suv that has more power than my 4 cylinder 160 hp Accord and handles like a car. I am considering 5 SUVs: Nissan Xterra, Toyota Rav 4, Honda Pilot, Jeep Grand Cherokee, and the Ford Explorer. So far I have only driven the base model Xterra and loved the way it drove, but would like to add more accesories. The power from the 265 hp is great and I like how Nissan designed its interior and exterior. I am looking into the SE model in Night Armor with an optional Grille/Brush guard. Is the Xterra the way to go or should I look elsewhere? I am worried about the gas mileage of the Xterra as well. Please let me know with you guys think! -MM
The 5 SUV's you said are all different. A Rav4 is not in the same category as a Pilot. The Xterra did not do well on the roll over test, which will increase the price of insurance. I would stay away from Jeep, Ford, and do not recommend the Nissan. Are you sure you want to consider the Pilot because it's a different vehicle category?
You can get a current Toyota Highlander cheap because a new model is coming out soon. Highlander's are also EXTREMELY reliable and a good car.
I would like to get an SUV that has no 3rd row seat as I do not need the extra seating. I am not sure if the highlander has 3 rows, but I know the Pilot does and is pretty much out of the question. The accord is great, but Honda has not impressed me with the CRV. Are there any other SUVS you would reccommend besides the highlander that has only two rows (driver and passenger rows.) I also did not hear about the Nissan Rollover test results either, but Edmunds and Motor Trend both picked as the top suv under $25000 and that says something I think! Also I test drove the Xterra and I enjoyed driving it, but any input would be very helpful as I do have time before I would like to decide. Thanks MM
If your wanting to wait a bit i would consider the all-new 2007 Hyundai Santa Fe, and the all-new CR-V coming out like in september i believe it is. The 07 Santa Fe looks amazing inside and out and the way Hyundai is going i would defenetly consider it, it looks like a very promising vehicle. The new CR-V from the spy shots it looks really good and it sure will be a good vehicle.
If you are not wanting to wait i would say the XTerra or the RAV4.
I have seen the new spyshots of the 2007 CRV, butI am very dissappointed they are not offering a V6 engine or the turbo offered in its RDX brother. Although the fron styling looks pretty sweet the back looks akward. I probably would not consider the CRV.AS you mentioned the Hyundai Santa Fe looks nice on the outside, but the interior I am not too pleased with. Also I could not see myself buying a "Hyundai" eventhough they have taken huge strides with the new sonata and azera. I guess I will have to get out there and try to find a V6 Rav4 to test drive, but they are very hard to find right now. I was also looking at the GMC Envoy, but I would like to stay with a foreign brand, as they are more reliable and tend to make better vehicles.
Also I have seen other forums discussing the new Mazda SUV, Subaru B9 Tribeca, and Nissan Murano, but I cannot stand the way these vehicles look! Whathappened to the typical rugged stlye of an SUV like the old Ford Explorer had and what the Xterra has?!
I have been in a similiar predicament. I really like the pilot and we drive to Lake Tahoe to go skiing in the winter. My oldest child is almost 12 and will start to want to bring his friends, he sat in the 3rd row (he is average height) and said it felt kind of squished, I can't imagine how that would be on a 4 hr drive, which is what it would take us as well. I have a big SUV at the moment but I do too much city running around so need to get something more economical. I don't think I am going to do pilot now, kids are just getting taller not smaller. Either the AWD SIenna or Odyessy I say.
just picked up a new '06 Pilot for my wife.. EX decent deal at 26213.....
anyone know if the XM can be installed by an outside vendor..like a stereo shop... or even a Best Buy or Circuit City.. dealer wanted 800 to install and upgrade the XM ready radio...there's gotta be a better and a cheaper way to do it..
trying to use the XM ready radio.. cleaner install..etc.. rather than go to an XM Roady or My Fi portable..
The Highlander and Pilot's percentage change of rollover was around 15% = 4 star. The Xterra is 25% = 3 star. You can get the Highlander with, or without the third row.
Comments
In the last few years I have downsized from a Suburban, to a Sequoia, and now the Pilot, and am happy to get 16-17mpg! (Instead of 11-12!)
Even the new RAV4 doesn't seem much smaller than the Highlander, and certainly not less functional. From what I've read, the new Highlander is supposed to get a little bigger, not smaller. And more radical looking, like an FX35/45 or Murano.
So far, we're quite happy with the Pilot. It's not perfect, but at $30k I don't expect it to be. Toyota's in general have a little better reliability, but Honda's reliability is nothing to sneeze at either. In the end, what clinched it is we needed occasional 8 passenger capacity.
They're both good comfortable crossover SUVs, just different. If you don't need the 8 passenger capacity, than the Highlander may be just fine.
Just some thoughts.
tom
As to the suspension, personally I wish the Pilot would use the MDX "sportier" suspension (and maybe it will in the future given the MDX redesign).
I must say, that I used to be a Honda fan but lately, I've been very disapointed with them. As I said in other posts, I sent letters to Honda about the steering wheel vibrations and Honda is just playing dum. If the new Pilot/MDX have less problems I would like the car, but in my opinion, Honda is not strict enough on quality control as of now.
The Highlander on the other hand had Bridgestones that we replaced at 20k miles because they were below the wear bars. I don't know if it is the tires or the Highlander causing such quick wear.
AFAIK, there is nothing inherently wrong with the Pilot's suspension design nor are the designs of competing SUV's inherently better.
- Mark
Anyone who has a substance abuse problem should get one of these instead. Just driving it makes you feel so good!
A comment on wheel vibrations, try having the wheels balanced using the Hunter Roadforce GSP9700 balancing system, and make sure that the lug nuts are torqued to proper specification. Over torqued lug nuts can cause wheel distortion over time causing vibrations, and also brake disc warpage.
Once I matured, I owned a couple of Acura Legends. Although this car also had independent rear suspension, the tires did not flare out as the Ford's did once there was a load in the trunk.
It seems to me that the tightness of the suspension dictates the flaring of the rear tires. The Pilot must not be as tight as the Acuras. JMHO.
As far as the Pilot goes, I see you can get a current model for 24,000 which isn't too bad. But the MPG is too low in the current model. I've been reading many people are getting 16-17 MPG way too low compared to my heavy 2001 Sienna getting 21 MPG.
Comparing the Pilot to the Murano I just assumed the Pilot was bigger, maybe I am wrong there. I know 2 people that have Muranos I think you can get one for 26,000. They are getting 27 MPG as stated on their electronic fuel gauge, I think that is pretty good. If The new Pilot still gets 16-17 MPG it's off my list. But I have a feeling the new Pilot and Highlander will get better MPG then the current models reguardless of size. The Japanese companies are great at getting MPG. Just look at the Corolla, Camry, Civic and Accord for proof of that.
Murano weight 4800 27 mpg
Sienna weight 5700 21 mpg
Pilot weight 5952 17 mpg
highlander weight 5360 ? mpg (probally 20 MPG)
For some people, the Highlander is just too small for their needs. I have a Freestyle, so I put in those specs too. For me, the Pilot didn't have enough space inside, even though it holds 8 versus 7 in my Freestyle (plus I only paid $25K). For legroom, there are 3" more in both the 2nd & 3rd rows in my Freestyle, and you can really notice the difference. Plus more cargo space behind the 3rd row. And it's a couple of inches shorter and narrower, so it fits into my garage better. But it is a foot longer than the Pilot, but that goes into the 6" more legroom and increased cargo space.
So while these vehicles can be compared, there are some definite space/size differences between them. Plus, after living with the Freestyle for over a year and 30K miles, I don't think I'd want to lose 3" of legroom in the 2nd & 3rd rows, nor the extra cargo space. Today, there's a huge blur between SUV, big station wagons, cross overs, but it's good there are the choices.
Hopefully I'll have the Freestyle for another 5 years and by then, the vehicle I'm hoping will be available will be an AWD Odyssey with a 2nd row 60/40 fold in the floor bench configuration 8 pass vehicle without sliding doors.
Highlander
L/W/H 184.6/71.9/67.9
Headroom 40.0/39.8/32.3
Legroom 40.7/36.4/30.2
Cargo behind row 1/2/3 80.6/39.7/10.5
Pilot
L/W/H 188.0/76.5/70.1
Headroom 41.9/40.1/38.6
Legroom 41.4/37.4/30.2
Cargo behind row 1/2/3 87.6/47.6/15.9
Freestyle
L/W/H 200.1/74.9/68.2
Headroom 39.4/39.8/38.6
Legroom 41.1/40.4/33.3
Cargo behind row 1/2/3 86.1/47.9/20.8
Compared on Edmunds, all AWD/4WD models
along with EPA highway mpg (which you may or may not agree with)
Murano - 3983 - 24 mpg
Pilot - 4453 - 22 mpg
Highlander - 3935 - 24 mpg
Sienna - 4330 - 23 mpg
Chevy Tahoe - 5524 - 21 mpg
For 2wd models: They all loose about 200lbs except the Murano.
Murano - 3851 - 24 mpg
Pilot - 4264 - 24 mpg
Highlander - 3650 - 25 mpg
Sienna - 4140 - 26 mpg
Chevy Tahoe - 5265 - 22 mpg
Also, get a tape measure out and you'll find the Freestyle is no more than 44 inches side to side, behind the 3rd row. The Pilot is 57 inches. I know which one would fit a set of golf clubs and which one wouldn't.
Plus I'm not sure where you had the position of the 2nd row when you were in the 3rd row, but if you slid up the 2nd row to get a few more inches in the 3rd row to get comfortable, then you did match the Freestyle in 3rd row legroom; however, then reduced the space of the 2nd row to 33" vs 41" in the Freestyle. And I could probably put 3 sets of golf clubs behind the 3rd row in the 21 cubic feet of space.
But it's just numbers like you said. The Freestyle is a foot longer than the Pilot, so it shouldn't be a big surprise that it does have more space inside, but if the Pilot has the space you need then that's all that matters.
193.4/72.8/73.7 L/W/H
39.8/38.7/37.4 Head Room Rows 1/2/3
42.4/36.9/34.9 Leg Room Rows 1/2/3
83.7/43.9/13.6 Cargo behind rows 1/2/3
That being said, I'd much rather have a Pilot then an Explorer.
With a 7 pass vehicle, you can get as small as a Mazda5 or as big as a giant SUV. And there's a lot in between. If you need an SUV for off-road or towing, then you need a true SUV. If it's just for light passenger duties and only occasional 7 pass needs, then some of the smaller crossovers/big station wagons might be needed. If you use all three rows of seats all the time, but don't need AWD or off-road capability, then a minivan is for you.
But of course you can always compare any two vehicles, but I always start with the overall interior size needs, and try to find the smallest vehicle that meets my needs. I looked at the Pilot & Highlander & Freestyle, but for me the extra foot in lenth of the Freestyle was worth the added room. The other two didn't meet my needs. And being a little less wide helps me pull into my 8' wide garage door. For me, the Freestyle felt/drove more like a car then either of the other two, which again makes sense since it's based on the Ford 500.
And then there's the cost factor. I don't need to pay for power that I won't use, and style and "luxury" features are low on my list of priorities. If I could have bought the Pilot for $25K, then I may have considered it, but it would have been closer to $30K.
Something missing in the Pilot are rear ceiling A/C vents like in the Freestyle. The Pilot only has vents between the front seats, which are good for keeping the second row passenger's knees cold, but don't help with the 3rd row passengers, nor with second row passengers sitting in the sun to cool their top half. The Freestyle has the rear A/C vents like the Pilot between the front seats, but also has 4 separate ceiling vents above the 2nd & 3rd rows that can be adjusted in many directions. We've used them lots of times in the summer and I'd never buy a three row vehicle without them. And there's an extra 3rd row heating vent beyond the normal vents under the first row seats.
Long post, but then the Freestyle isn't as well known as the Pilot, so I though I'd explain some of its features.
WHen I quoted the MPG I took it from personal experience and what I read on the boards. Granted my sienna is a 2001 I get 21 MPG. I dont trust stickers or books for that info.
On the MPG, I feel really good about our 03 Tahoe then. 17mpg (50/50 mix) and 19+ on the highway. Of the 6 cars/trucks/SUVs I've owned I've always gotten the posted EPA MPG or slightly better. But as it says "your mileage may vary".
You list some good reasons for looking at the Freestyle but a 2WD LX Pilot can be had for $25K I believe and probably not much above that for AWD either. Heck, I paid less than 30 for my AWD EXL. And despite the lenght, the Pilot has similar cargo and passenger space (due to its 3" width advantage.
Good point about the vents but keep in mind that the Pilot has one of the best AC systems on the market. It doesn't have the top vents but I am not sure that's a biggie given how well the system operates as a whole. I have never has a problem getting the whole interior cooled quickly.
Front/Middle/Rear Seats:
Headroom 41.1 39.2 37.9
Legroom 41.3 39.0 25.6
Luggage capacity behind 3rd row is 16.9 cubic feet
Seems like for a SUV of this size, it doesn't make good use of it's interior.
Also, passenger volume in cubic feet means less than then actual legroom for your legs. I'd rather have more legroom and less overall cubic feet. The combined 6" of extra leg room in the 2nd & 3rd rows is nice to have, as well as the cargo well behind the 3rd row.
I bought the Freestyle because it has more cargo space, more passenger space, better mpg, better climate control system, is quieter (quieter driving down the highway at 70Db vs 76Db driving at 70mph according to Edmunds road tests), and cost less for the same features then other similar vehicles. And in my opinion it drives more car-like than SUV-like, which my wife and I both like.
But people look at different aspects when buying a car, so what's important for one isn't as important for another. But it's something to talk about. But I better get out of here because this is a Pilot forum!
Given the Freestyle has 17.6 cubic feet and is 2 inches longer than a 03 Tahoe. It should have more space. Granted its less than 1 cubic foot. But once the seats are folded the Tahoe has 20 cubic feet more. Even the much Shorter Pilot has 3 cubic feet more.
Given the Freestyles lack of Utility in a 1000 lb towing its near worhless as a SUV. A 4 cyl. Subaru tows over twice that and gets 28 mpg. A 1000lb towing limit is more like a Civic. The Pilot is respectable at 4500lbs.
Can the freestyle have three 19" wide car seats in the second row? nope. With 3 little kids your required to use the third row because the booster seats don't fit.
How about a larger turning circle of 40 feet in the Freestyle compared to 38 for both the Pilot and Tahoe.
All the other companies have figured out that there are more letters to the alphabet than "E" and "F" for model names. :P
glad to get opinions and information from all perspectives. And different choices are great for different needs/wants. Personally I love the width of the Pilot as it really allows 3 people to sit comforably in the 2nd row. Simply a better experience (more shoulder and hip room) as compared with the Highlander and probably the freestyle (but as you say, more legroom in the freestyle). Heck, I can fit 3 kids in seats in the 2nd row and that's a huge consideration for me (but not everyone). Also, I didn't want the length of a minivan for parking and my garage but that's just my individual preference.
When I say "one of the best AC systems" I mean that the Pilot has two compressors and really pumps out the cold air (it cools this large space more quickly than any vehicle I have owned) - not sure of the exact BTUs but it's high. I view the AC system of the Pilot as a stregth not a weakness. Compressor size might be a bigger consideration for some vs. overhead vents. Ideally, it would have both.
But you are right, based on features, utility and ride, people should at least look at the freestyle.
You're correct about the Freestyle towing. The Freestyle can't tow much. But since I've never had the need to tow anything, nor do I forsee the need to ever tow anything, a vehicle could be capable of towing 10,000lbs and it's meaningless to me. Similarly, the Freestyle's 5% larger turning circle you mentioned doesn't seem to have much impact on day to day use.
What does have an impact on my everyday driving are things like handling, low interior noise levels, trunk space, and passenger space. These are the areas that matter on a daily basis, which is why I mentioned them in my previous posts.
And by the way I've had a baby seat and two booster seats in the 2nd row, when my wife and her friend went to the zoo together with our 9 month daughter, and her 3 and 6 year old kids, and although it was a little tight in the 2nd row with all three carseats, they all fit. And no, I don't know if they were all 19" wide carseats.
But this is a Pilot forum, and if I needed to tow, then I'd buy the Pilot over the Freestyle in a second. And if I needed to carry three across in the second row all the time, then I probably wouldn't buy a Freestyle either, but I'd probably buy a minivan at that point, because even if you can fit three car & booster seats in the second row, I really wouldn't want to do that on long road trips.
When I said "no depth" behind the 3rd rows of these vehicles, I was speaking relatively--not literally. Obviously there is "some" depth behind all of them, but not much. You're not going to pack much in that "foot" of space behind the 3rd row of your Freestyle, especially as narrow as it is. Nor will anyone pack much behind the 3rd row of the Pilot. BUT, the Pilot will pack MORE because it still has more depth than that "foot" of space in the Freestyle, and, as I said earlier, is over "a foot" wider than it.
Glad your freestyle works for you. If it could tow 4000 lbs I'd probably consider one. If mini-vans could tow just a touch more I might consider one. Then again the difference between 19mpg and 24mpg on the highway is only what $200 or $300 for the year?
Only thing that kept us from a Pilot was, first year model (when we purchased), poor sales person, first year price, and how close dealships were. 30 miles vs 1 mile. The Pilot itself fit our needs and we liked it.
--jay
My mom has the Van and it has a ton of room and drives nice.
But I agree that the Odyssey is a much better people and cargo hauler than the Pilot- but no AWD to go to Tahoe.
I will say since the Pilot is significantly shorter than the Odyssey it's more maneuverable and easier to park if you live in a more urban environement.
tom
In CAL, the Ody might make a lot of sense.
Thanks for experiences.
I would recommend an AWD Sienna because it has a high ground clearance, and AWD. Think about it. What do you think?
-MM
You can get a current Toyota Highlander cheap because a new model is coming out soon. Highlander's are also EXTREMELY reliable and a good car.
I would like to get an SUV that has no 3rd row seat as I do not need the extra seating. I am not sure if the highlander has 3 rows, but I know the Pilot does and is pretty much out of the question. The accord is great, but Honda has not impressed me with the CRV. Are there any other SUVS you would reccommend besides the highlander that has only two rows (driver and passenger rows.) I also did not hear about the Nissan Rollover test results either, but Edmunds and Motor Trend both picked as the top suv under $25000 and that says something I think! Also I test drove the Xterra and I enjoyed driving it, but any input would be very helpful as I do have time before I would like to decide.
Thanks MM
If you are not wanting to wait i would say the XTerra or the RAV4.
Also I have seen other forums discussing the new Mazda SUV, Subaru B9 Tribeca, and Nissan Murano, but I cannot stand the way these vehicles look! Whathappened to the typical rugged stlye of an SUV like the old Ford Explorer had and what the Xterra has?!
anyone know if the XM can be installed by an outside vendor..like a stereo shop... or even a Best Buy or Circuit City.. dealer wanted 800 to install and upgrade the XM ready radio...there's gotta be a better and a cheaper way to do it..
trying to use the XM ready radio.. cleaner install..etc.. rather than go to an XM Roady or My Fi portable..
gotta have our XM..
You can get the Highlander with, or without the third row.
http://www.safercar.gov/NCAP/Cars/3563.html