Who cares about slaloms, and offroading, I bet you not half off people with certified offroaders ever take their rides of paved ways.
AND CAN WE COME BACK TO MY REQUEST, PLS TRY MATCHING YOUR TACOMA TO THE AWARDS THE VERSATILE RIDGELINE GOT ON ITS FIRST FORAY IN THE TRUCK MARKET.I JUST LISTED 12 FOR PETES SAKE.Don't avoid my line of argument by flaunting your 0-60 times and towing capacities.
TOWING CAPACITIES AND 0-60 TIMES AINT EVERYTHING, ALL AROUND VERSATILITY RULES AND THE RIDGELINE IS WITHOUT PAR.THAT'S THE PARADIGM SHIFT OF THE FUTURE.
YOU WANNA BARGAIN? HOW ABOUT LISTING JUST TEN INSTEAD OF THE 12 TO MATCH THE RIDGELINES'. I'M GIVING YOU TEN YEARS TO COME UP WITH IT.Best of luck lol. :sick:
Why do you think the crossovers are eating into the market of traditional SUV's big time? It's due to the PARADIGM SHIFT OF THE FUTURE.SUV buyers want all around versatility on their rides.Impecable handling, comfy ride, and standard safety features are just the starters. Offroading prowess and 0-60 towing times are becoming fancy add on's.
This paradigm shift is catching up on trucks too. This explains why twelve award winning bodies recognize the Ridgeline as the best midsizer. Don't get me wrong, I am convince the Tacoma owns the Ridgeline on exterior looks, 0-60 times and towing capabilities. In everything else your Tacoma can't hold a candle against the Ridgeline.
TWELVE AWARD GIVING BODIES WITH CREDENTIALS TO BOOT CAN'T ALL BE WRONG AT THE SAME TIME.WHILE ONE SELF PROCLAIMED ENGINEER WITHOUT VERIFIABLE CREDENTIALS CAN'T BE RIGHT ON THIS TACOMA VS RIDGELINE ARGUMENT.
Anyway, to help you out figure out what wards/recognitions your Tacoma got I'm lowering it to 8 vs the 12 I mentioned for the Ridgeline and I'll wait for your post for the next 20 years.FAIR ENOUGH? :confuse:
I think the original poster wanted a objective look at how well a Ridgeline being a new type of truck compares to the old design. But it quickly denegrating into a comparison of industry and obscure awards and abilities of aftermarket parts.
It doesn't matter how many awards a vehicle has, it's not going to take you from point A to point B any better. Majority of the time that's just marketing fodder anyway. As for aftermarket parts, if you need it and use it, great. Otherwise, the same point applies.
Now I think one of the things the OP asked was whether the Ridgeline warranted the price. Last time I ventured by a Honda dealership, I had a chance to talk to a sales manager, and he had mentioned to me that Honda is pushing a great lease on the car. I asked him point blank is sales were off. he responded that "perhaps", sales aren't as high as expected. So maybe the market is responding with a softly whispered no? When I was looking for my Taco, it was quite hard to find the DC LB SR5. But that may be due to most of them being made in TRD rather then market acceptance for them. But I didn't think the TRD 2k addition was worth it for basically a plug in the bed and upgraded suspension and wheels that I wouldn't really appreciate. Perhaps Mr. Market agrees with me and that's why there were more TRD readily available.
Anyone know if a truck topper makes for better mileage? I was thinking if it did, it would be offset by the 100lbs or more of added weight. Right?
Oh, I see...since the Ridgeline does most things better than the Tacoma, it mustn't be compared to it? Good try, toykick, I'm not buying it.
On an unrelated note, I just read my March issue of Motor Trend; the new Ford SportTrac is in it. YES, it offers a V-8, but the V-6 model (210 hp) starts at an estimiated $27,000 (comparable to that of the Ridgeline's). I'll pass on that.
Agreed, ain't for me either. From the pictures, the bed of the truck is quite truncated. Wonder if they will remedy that by offering other bed options. On a side question, isn't the Ranger the basis for the Explorer too? Or was that long long ago?
Where's the picture of the Avalanche's lockable in-bed trunk? The dual-action tailgate? The $27k base of the Chevy?
It's not there. Just like:
There is no midgate, traditional 4WD, or 5.3 liter standard engine.
These are two different vehicles, with styling that shares its basic proportions. What's next, are you going to point out the similarities in the Camry and Sonata?
I have sort of stayed out of this, but when the Avalanche was brought into it I had to say something. The Avalanche in the foreground is better looking than most I have seen. Most I have seen have the plastic slabs on the side like the one in the background.
They look ugly to me and I would not have to think twice in choosing between the Avalanche and the Ridgeline. I have never owned a Honda, but I certainly would have no problem owning one.
The same can be said for the Nissan and Toyota brands and I have owned several models of both of the latter.
As for the Avalanche I look at it as an overgrown Aztec which has got to be one of the ugliest automotive designs ever thrust upon an unsuspecting public. Can you spell U G L Y?
I believe the last Explorer to be fully on the Ranger platform is the 1995-200(1?) model. It even shared the basic dashboard. The Ranger pickup, sadly, has been left behind the rest of the Ford's lineup renewal, and therefore, the small truck market also. The SportTrac debuted AFTER the most up to date Ranger (I don't count styling changes as a NEW model), so why the new SportTrac is coming first, I have no idea. It looks like Ford will have another Hertz queen in its Ranger (like the Taurus was) until they completely kill it off.
I wouldn't say that the V8 Silverado "wastes" more gas. I'd say that it uses more gas. EPA puts the highest rated V8 Silverado 4WD at 15-19 mpg. Or were you thinking of the hybrid?
The closest to the Ridgeline in "design" would be the SportTrac and Avalanche. However, one is far smaller, cheaper, and less capable. The other much larger, more expensive, and more capable (towing). So, despite design similarities, these vehicles are not good matches.
Meanwhile the Ridgeline is very similar in size, price, and configuration to the crew cab versions of the Tacoma, Frontier, and Dakota. The only exception being towing capacity. So these vehicles are the closest by viture of having the fewest differences.
Toy, if you would take a little time and look something up before spelling it out here, maybe you'd have more credibility (or at least MUCH less false information).
Thanks for that link, great stuff. Horrible amounts of pollution by that truck though. Don't think going hybrid will really help. Could the General put some more R&D into a truly greener engine instead of just creating more waste via used batteries while not returning that much better fuel economy? What ever happened to the promise of Hydrogen?
I believe I heard something about Ford killing off the Explorer in the near future, that means the SportTrac will be the only thing on that platform. Wonder if perhaps the new Ranger, if there's a new Ranger in the works will be on that platform as well. Anyone hear anything about a new Ranger?
Just in case anyone else wants to compare any other trucks.
A side note... The Ridgeline appears in the Large truck category on this website, while others from this thread are listed in either the Small or Medium. This is because size is detemined by interior volume. Because the Ridgeline has a larger than normal passenger space, it falls into the large truck category.
"Anyone know if a truck topper makes for better mileage? I was thinking if it did, it would be offset by the 100lbs or more of added weight. Right?"
A "topper" as in full cabin for the back, or as in a tonneau cover?
I know that a tonneau will not improve mileage. It prevents the bed from creating a tumbling air current behind the cab. That rotating mass of air is actually more aerodynamic than a solid surface and is necessary for good mileage.
I meant as in a topper that's Cab High so creates a cabin in the back but does not stick above the cab of the truck so not introducing a higher profile.
Wow, I didn't know that. Each one of these companies say the tonneau is a gas saver. Check out www.4are.com, they even have a little calculater. Although seeing that they sell the stuff have to take with a grain of salt.
Not to question your expertise, but are you sure that it wouldn't help in the least bit? A closed window on a car gives better mileage even though with an open window it would create a rotating mass as well, albeit in a horizontal direction.
lol alright... 12 awards for a SUT not a Truck. There is something which compares to the ridgeline and thats the avalanche... ----
This is getting outrageously ridiculous. One moment toykick was praising the 0-60 times and towing superiority of the Tacoma vs the Ridgeline. Then all of a sudden Toykick refused to compare and match the 12 awards and the overall versatility of the Ridgeline by diverting everyones attention to the Avalanche.
Nice try Toykick, maybe I should be more lenient with your beloved Tacoma. How about coming up with 6 awards vs my twelve and I give you 50 years to come up with it.THIS IS GONNA BE FUN.
Favourite truck - Frontier 2 things I'd change- O.E. tires and improve gas mileage 2nd pick- Tacoma - long history/reliability 3rd pick - Ridgeline - hey, it is a Honda after all 4th pick - Dakota - it's capable enough 5th pick - Colorado and twin - um....um.....they look O.K. and someone has to follow the leaders
I have a topper on my Tacoma, and it certainly did not increase my mileage. The discovery channel has a show called Myth Busters that did a experment to see if a truck gets better mileage with the tailgate down as has always been claimed so far as to sell the mesh tailgates and bed nets. Turns out the truck went considerably farther with the tailgate up. Millions of people have bought these products because it looked like it made sense. I drove around with my tailgate down alot, but I guess the onny thing I got from doing it was rock chips all over the tailgate.
There was a thread on the mpg with different covers on the beds on one of the Frontier forums a while back.
It was posted that tailgate down was the worst mpg, then tailgate up, then tonneau cover and best was a cab high top. The cab high was best if it went from the top of the cab at the front and then tapered down as it went back.
yeah, was reading some stuff back in early 90's regarding the tailgate up or down issue. Had friends who were firm believers of it being down and myself being tailgate up just out of the inability to carry a load in the with the tailgate down without dumping the load and being too cheap to buy a cargo net, guess I made it up on top with that one outta sheer cheapness.
Trying to decide whether or not to put a bed topper on. But decision may have been settled by wife because can't put things in back securely just to run into store and such.
Any word on when any of these truck might see an update (engine, styling, tranny, congifuartions, etc..)? I know they are pretty new, especially the Honda.
They had a picture of one that was flush with the cab at the front and then had a slope to the back that looked like it might have been about 18" at the tailgate.
It looked kind of weird to me and would not have been very practical for my application.
One of the things I find appealing about Colorado is its width, which is very garage-able. Colorado is 68.6" wide, which is 9.2" narrower than Ridgeline, 6" narrower than Tacoma and 4.2" narrower than Frontier. If you park your truck out in the weather, this isn't an issue, but if you park it in a garage that's shared with another vehicle and other stuff, width becomes an inportant factor. Throw in a smaller 16' garage door that are common these days and two vehicles as wide as Ridgeline give you a scant 12" to the right, an impossible 12" between vehicles and 12" to the left.
Lengths are all about the same, with the Tacoma short bed the longest at 208.1", Coly 207.1, Ridgeline 206.8 and Frontier the most garage-able lengthwise at 205.5".
I actually thought about that when I compared vehicles because, for one, my garage is only 10' x 18' with the entrance only being approx. 9'. To top it off, the garage itself is built at a right angle to our townhouse and we have to maneuver a tad. Cause of this, the width of a vehicle plays an important part in choosing which truck to own. That's another reason the Fronty works for me. Nissan up-sized it very well. The Taco was too small, now it appears a little too big (for a compact). The G.M. products were never in the running for me.
I agree. For *my* needs, the Frontier has the best balance of size, style, utility and configuration. Plus, mine will be a Crew Cab 4x2 6-Speed manual and the other players don't offer that combination.
"One of the things I find appealing about Colorado is its width, which is very garage-able. Colorado is 68.6" wide, which is 9.2" narrower than Ridgeline, 6" narrower than Tacoma and 4.2" narrower than Frontier."
This is also a consideration when off-roading. With my Silverado, I had to stop and trim a lot of brush to avoid scratching the sides. Ridgeline is nearly as wide as a full-size truck, while the others are narrower as you pointed out. Full-size comfort like the Ridgeline has is great most of the time, but there are situations where narrower is better.
Part of the reason I have the Frontier is more real-world leg room in the back seat than Colorado or Tacoma. There are many other reasons why I chose the Frontier. So far (23,000 miles) it's been a good choice.
I'm waiting for the 07's and will then deal for a King Cab LE 4x4. The Taco may still be in the running though. The size thing really does make a difference to me, not to mention the no dicker price (at least at our local Toy dealer). Besides, I'm not loyal to any particular brand. Yet, I generally prefer the Japanese makes. And I agree with what you posted regarding the Fronty.
The Colorado/Canyon does have an advantage in that regard, but G.M. in my opinion slipped up. Why not just improve on what they had going with their S 10/Sonoma trucks. Keep the Six Cylinder and increase the size of the truck minimally. From what I understand, the 5 does not improve mileage. Are there any advantages to that power-train? As far as the Ridgeline goes, I'm not sure if I like their all wheel drive set-up. It only kicks in when needed right? My Subie is full time and is wonderful to drive in all conditions, but that's another subject. Good to hear about your Frontier.
"As far as the Ridgeline goes, I'm not sure if I like their all wheel drive set-up. It only kicks in when needed right?"
Actually, that's one of the advantages of the Ridgeline and why it gets slightly better mileage than competing trucks. It does have a switch to lock in 4wd at low speeds, kind of like a poor-mans's 4-lo so to speak. You're right, though, in that most of the time it runs in fwd and automatically engages the rear when needed.
Locking in 4wd, I took a Ridgeline up an approximate 30-degree grade of loose dirt and gravel. I had originally tried the hill letting it automatically kick in to 4wd, but it didn't make it. By comparison, a conventional 4wd truck makes this same hill in 4-hi, which is basically what the Ridgeline is when you lock it into 4wd.
Thus if you can live with the Ridgeline's modest ground clearance (which I believe is actually greater than a Dakota's) and no low-range, you actually have a reasonably capable 4x4 that saves a little fuel by running in fwd most of the time.
No doubt, the Ridgeline has its advantages. How much of a lag would the Ridgeline's 4 wheel drive system have between slippage and engagement ( when the 4wd isn't locked in )?.
It reacts to both slippage and throttle input. If you step on the gas, it will activate the rear axles as you push the pedal. That makes it very difficult to tell how slip can happen.
FWIW, the MDX was the first vehicle with VTM-4. One car mag managed to get a tire to chirp, while another could not.
Just a snapshot of the turning circles for these vehicles. With some models, the actual number will vary greatly depending on the body configuration or drivetrain.
Usually, every 2 or 3 years, the Japanese carmakers massage the styling, powertrains, and interiors a little to differentiate things a little bit. I wonder who would be first?
Also, when will Nissan decide to finally re-test their numbers against the new SAE standards?
Most car manufacturers are on a 5-year product cycle, with a facelift coming on either the 3rd or 4th year of that cycle. If the vehicle is not doing well, in terms of sales, there may be 2 facelifts within that 5-year cycle.
Having said that, trucks have historically been on longer product cycle than cars, but that is changing with the ever more crowded market.
Also, when will Nissan decide to finally re-test their numbers against the new SAE standards?
I don't expect Nissan (or most other companies) will do that until they retune the engine enough so that it generates more power than the current design.
Not so fast Mr know it all. Technology has nothing to do with all that. The Ridgeline may have all the techno-hype for all the Bobby-Trendys.....but let me inspect those leaf-springs after a good mud-pull. Anyone can put a truck ontop of a car frame...but the real question is...can it do "truck" things...besides having a fancy place to store groceries? Hey Rubicon Express...go back to Jeep land and put that dinosaur to rest. They don't put solid springs on Jeeps or Hondas, go figure. :lemon: :surprise:
When did Honda ever claim to do everything a body-on-frame truck can do? If you think about it, how many people use their trucks to do a "mud pull?" as you say? My guess is not very many. For that market the F150 is better.Ridgeline is better for the consumers that drive trucks to haul the big screen TV home from Sears, and takes the family out on the beach. The Ridgeline is a great entry for the 95% of people who don't use their trucks to haul 5 ton trailers, ride the mud holes to go out and rescue the horses, or go "mud ridin'" on the weekends for fun.
Ok, I give'm that. But for 11 or 12 mpg city, and 17 or 18 hwy...(if you're lucky) You may as well get a real truck, like a Ranger or something. That's all. If you're picking-up a TV at Sears, you can find accomodations to get it home, you can put groceries in almost any car, but for the other 364 days of the year....you'r driving a $30,000 grocery-getter that gets horrible gas mileage, for its class. And I know most people arn't taking the Ridgeline muddin' or rock-climbin' , but in the Honda ads...they show the Ridgerunner going up a mountain or something. Now...I didn't just fall off the manure spreader yesterday. No body is taking that AWD toaster oven up a mountain...or even a mud-puddle for that fact. I belong to Robby Barnes 4WD Club...and they were telling me that Honda might even stop making those things next year, because of lack of sales. I'm just trying to get info on why people are buying these things. :lemon:
No body is taking that AWD toaster oven up a mountain...or even a mud-puddle for that fact. I belong to Robby Barnes 4WD Club...and they were telling me that Honda might even stop making those things next year, because of lack of sales. I'm just trying to get info on why people are buying these things
You are woefully uninformed. I take my RL up unpaved steep mountain roads in the Utah (Brianhead area) all the time. I take it on deep sandy BLM trails by the Coral Pink Sand Dunes, and its performance is stellar. What the hec do you think I bought it for??
My wifes partner uses her RL off road daily and to haul her horses on her ranch. Really, you don't have a clue what your talking about. The RL will go where ever it's ground clearance and approach & departure angles will permit it, which are some pretty rugged places.
Sales are fine. Honda exceeded their goal for the Ridgeline in its first year. I don't think Honda is keeping Robby up to date with their production plans LOL. Your pretty funny.
I'm getting 19-20 mpg. Get informed before you post.
I'm not saying the Ridgeline isn't a good truck. But take the Ranger for instance...they have a solid drive-shaft and limited slip rear-ends. The struts that Rubicon Express mentioned earlier, are obsolete units that Jeep chucked-out the window when the Chrysler Corp. had that big stress issue with their front-ends. Now...If I'm not mistaking then....why in the heck are they puttin' that same setup on the Ridge? That's what I'm about..the facts! You can just fly-off the jibs with info...but if your not around the 4WD community..I mean hard-core..into off-road...then you probably are going to overlook specs. My friend has his own suspension lift company, that actually puts on better units than from factory. And I have been goin' over in the evenings, for the last several years, helping with the installs. I see what the heck they throw on these disposable trucks nowadays.
"Now...If I'm not mistaking then....why in the heck are they puttin' that same setup on the Ridge?"
Honda is not known for it's off-road vehicles. They make vehicles that are primarily on road, with some off road capability. The RL is designed for primarily suburban use; the trips to the Home Depot, towing the boat or jetskis to the lake, etc. No one is claiming it is a rootin' tootin' off-roadin' rig... but it will ride better than those rigs, and provide a better over all vehicle for the urban driver.
Comments
maybe mugen might come out with stronger struts for the ridgeline in the future...
AND CAN WE COME BACK TO MY REQUEST, PLS TRY MATCHING YOUR TACOMA TO THE AWARDS THE VERSATILE RIDGELINE GOT ON ITS FIRST FORAY IN THE TRUCK MARKET.I JUST LISTED 12 FOR PETES SAKE.Don't avoid my line of argument by flaunting your 0-60 times and towing capacities.
TOWING CAPACITIES AND 0-60 TIMES AINT EVERYTHING, ALL AROUND VERSATILITY RULES AND THE RIDGELINE IS WITHOUT PAR.THAT'S THE PARADIGM SHIFT OF THE FUTURE.
YOU WANNA BARGAIN? HOW ABOUT LISTING JUST TEN INSTEAD OF THE 12 TO MATCH THE RIDGELINES'. I'M GIVING YOU TEN YEARS TO COME UP WITH IT.Best of luck lol. :sick:
This paradigm shift is catching up on trucks too. This explains why twelve award winning bodies recognize the Ridgeline as the best midsizer. Don't get me wrong, I am convince the Tacoma owns the Ridgeline on exterior looks, 0-60 times and towing capabilities. In everything else your Tacoma can't hold a candle against the Ridgeline.
TWELVE AWARD GIVING BODIES WITH CREDENTIALS TO BOOT CAN'T ALL BE WRONG AT THE SAME TIME.WHILE ONE SELF PROCLAIMED ENGINEER WITHOUT VERIFIABLE CREDENTIALS CAN'T BE RIGHT ON THIS TACOMA VS RIDGELINE ARGUMENT.
Anyway, to help you out figure out what wards/recognitions your Tacoma got I'm lowering it to 8 vs the 12 I mentioned for the Ridgeline and I'll wait for your post for the next 20 years.FAIR ENOUGH? :confuse:
It doesn't matter how many awards a vehicle has, it's not going to take you from point A to point B any better. Majority of the time that's just marketing fodder anyway. As for aftermarket parts, if you need it and use it, great. Otherwise, the same point applies.
Now I think one of the things the OP asked was whether the Ridgeline warranted the price. Last time I ventured by a Honda dealership, I had a chance to talk to a sales manager, and he had mentioned to me that Honda is pushing a great lease on the car. I asked him point blank is sales were off. he responded that "perhaps", sales aren't as high as expected. So maybe the market is responding with a softly whispered no? When I was looking for my Taco, it was quite hard to find the DC LB SR5. But that may be due to most of them being made in TRD rather then market acceptance for them. But I didn't think the TRD 2k addition was worth it for basically a plug in the bed and upgraded suspension and wheels that I wouldn't really appreciate. Perhaps Mr. Market agrees with me and that's why there were more TRD readily available.
Anyone know if a truck topper makes for better mileage? I was thinking if it did, it would be offset by the 100lbs or more of added weight. Right?
On an unrelated note, I just read my March issue of Motor Trend; the new Ford SportTrac is in it. YES, it offers a V-8, but the V-6 model (210 hp) starts at an estimiated $27,000 (comparable to that of the Ridgeline's). I'll pass on that.
Where's the picture of the Avalanche's lockable in-bed trunk? The dual-action tailgate? The $27k base of the Chevy?
It's not there. Just like:
There is no midgate, traditional 4WD, or 5.3 liter standard engine.
These are two different vehicles, with styling that shares its basic proportions. What's next, are you going to point out the similarities in the Camry and Sonata?
Trust me, it isn't news to me.
They look ugly to me and I would not have to think twice in choosing between the Avalanche and the Ridgeline. I have never owned a Honda, but I certainly would have no problem owning one.
The same can be said for the Nissan and Toyota
brands and I have owned several models of both of the latter.
As for the Avalanche I look at it as an overgrown Aztec which has got to be one of the ugliest automotive designs ever thrust upon an
unsuspecting public. Can you spell U G L Y?
Now ask me how I really feel.
OkieScot
http://www.epa.gov/greenvehicles/E-CHEVROLET-Silverado1500-06.htm
I wouldn't say that the V8 Silverado "wastes" more gas. I'd say that it uses more gas. EPA puts the highest rated V8 Silverado 4WD at 15-19 mpg. Or were you thinking of the hybrid?
Meanwhile the Ridgeline is very similar in size, price, and configuration to the crew cab versions of the Tacoma, Frontier, and Dakota. The only exception being towing capacity. So these vehicles are the closest by viture of having the fewest differences.
Because he is so good at it, perhaps?
Good job on doing your homework, varmint.
Toy, if you would take a little time and look something up before spelling it out here, maybe you'd have more credibility (or at least MUCH less false information).
Just in case anyone else wants to compare any other trucks.
A side note... The Ridgeline appears in the Large truck category on this website, while others from this thread are listed in either the Small or Medium. This is because size is detemined by interior volume. Because the Ridgeline has a larger than normal passenger space, it falls into the large truck category.
A "topper" as in full cabin for the back, or as in a tonneau cover?
I know that a tonneau will not improve mileage. It prevents the bed from creating a tumbling air current behind the cab. That rotating mass of air is actually more aerodynamic than a solid surface and is necessary for good mileage.
Trashed truck
It's from the program "Top Gear" broadcasted on the BBC. They took a 13 years old 190 000 miles truck and beat it to hell, literally.
Oh, and it's a Toyota Hi-Lux!
Wow, I didn't know that. Each one of these companies say the tonneau is a gas saver. Check out www.4are.com, they even have a little calculater. Although seeing that they sell the stuff have to take with a grain of salt.
Not to question your expertise, but are you sure that it wouldn't help in the least bit? A closed window on a car gives better mileage even though with an open window it would create a rotating mass as well, albeit in a horizontal direction.
----
This is getting outrageously ridiculous. One moment toykick was praising the 0-60 times and towing superiority of the Tacoma vs the Ridgeline. Then all of a sudden Toykick refused to compare and match the 12 awards and the overall versatility of the Ridgeline by diverting everyones attention to the Avalanche.
Nice try Toykick, maybe I should be more lenient with your beloved Tacoma. How about coming up with 6 awards vs my twelve and I give you 50 years to come up with it.THIS IS GONNA BE FUN.
2 things I'd change- O.E. tires and improve gas mileage
2nd pick- Tacoma - long history/reliability
3rd pick - Ridgeline - hey, it is a Honda after all
4th pick - Dakota - it's capable enough
5th pick - Colorado and twin - um....um.....they look O.K. and someone has to follow the leaders
The discovery channel has a show called Myth Busters that did a experment to see if a truck gets better mileage with the tailgate down as has always been claimed so far as to sell the mesh tailgates and bed nets. Turns out the truck went considerably farther with the tailgate up. Millions of people have bought these products because it looked like it made sense. I drove around with my tailgate down alot, but I guess the onny thing I got from doing it was rock chips all over the tailgate.
It was posted that tailgate down was the worst
mpg, then tailgate up, then tonneau cover and best was a cab high top. The cab high was best if it went from the top of the cab at the front and then tapered down as it went back.
I wish I could remember where I saw it.
OkieScot
Trying to decide whether or not to put a bed topper on. But decision may have been settled by wife because can't put things in back securely just to run into store and such.
Cab high would be my first choice, but all makes I've come across so far doesn't really taper on the back, the glass however are all set in a slant.
Now that's one thing Ridgeline owner's wouldn't have to worry about with their locking "trunk".
They had a picture of one that was flush with the cab at the front and then had a slope to
the back that looked like it might have been about 18" at the tailgate.
It looked kind of weird to me and would not have been very practical for my application.
OkieScot
Lengths are all about the same, with the Tacoma short bed the longest at 208.1", Coly 207.1, Ridgeline 206.8 and Frontier the most garage-able lengthwise at 205.5".
Cause of this, the width of a vehicle plays an important part in choosing which truck to own.
That's another reason the Fronty works for me. Nissan up-sized it very well. The Taco was too small, now it appears a little too big (for a compact).
The G.M. products were never in the running for me.
This is also a consideration when off-roading. With my Silverado, I had to stop and trim a lot of brush to avoid scratching the sides. Ridgeline is nearly as wide as a full-size truck, while the others are narrower as you pointed out. Full-size comfort like the Ridgeline has is great most of the time, but there are situations where narrower is better.
Part of the reason I have the Frontier is more real-world leg room in the back seat than Colorado or Tacoma. There are many other reasons why I chose the Frontier. So far (23,000 miles) it's been a good choice.
As far as the Ridgeline goes, I'm not sure if I like their all wheel drive set-up. It only kicks in when needed right?
My Subie is full time and is wonderful to drive in all conditions, but that's another subject.
Good to hear about your Frontier.
Actually, that's one of the advantages of the Ridgeline and why it gets slightly better mileage than competing trucks. It does have a switch to lock in 4wd at low speeds, kind of like a poor-mans's 4-lo so to speak. You're right, though, in that most of the time it runs in fwd and automatically engages the rear when needed.
Locking in 4wd, I took a Ridgeline up an approximate 30-degree grade of loose dirt and gravel. I had originally tried the hill letting it automatically kick in to 4wd, but it didn't make it. By comparison, a conventional 4wd truck makes this same hill in 4-hi, which is basically what the Ridgeline is when you lock it into 4wd.
Thus if you can live with the Ridgeline's modest ground clearance (which I believe is actually greater than a Dakota's) and no low-range, you actually have a reasonably capable 4x4 that saves a little fuel by running in fwd most of the time.
FWIW, the MDX was the first vehicle with VTM-4. One car mag managed to get a tire to chirp, while another could not.
Tacoma: 36.1 - 44.0
Ridgeline: 42.6
Frontier: 43.3
Dakota: 44.0
Colorado: 40.7 - 44.3
Also, when will Nissan decide to finally re-test their numbers against the new SAE standards?
Having said that, trucks have historically been on longer product cycle than cars, but that is changing with the ever more crowded market.
Bob
I don't expect Nissan (or most other companies) will do that until they retune the engine enough so that it generates more power than the current design.
But can they put a car on top of a truck frame? That would be a more accurate description of the Ridgeline's underpinnings.
You are woefully uninformed. I take my RL up unpaved steep mountain roads in the Utah (Brianhead area) all the time. I take it on deep sandy BLM trails by the Coral Pink Sand Dunes, and its performance is stellar. What the hec do you think I bought it for??
My wifes partner uses her RL off road daily and to haul her horses on her ranch. Really, you don't have a clue what your talking about. The RL will go where ever it's ground clearance and approach & departure angles will permit it, which are some pretty rugged places.
Sales are fine. Honda exceeded their goal for the Ridgeline in its first year. I don't think Honda is keeping Robby up to date with their production plans LOL. Your pretty funny.
I'm getting 19-20 mpg. Get informed before you post.
Honda is not known for it's off-road vehicles. They make vehicles that are primarily on road, with some off road capability. The RL is designed for primarily suburban use; the trips to the Home Depot, towing the boat or jetskis to the lake, etc. No one is claiming it is a rootin' tootin' off-roadin' rig... but it will ride better than those rigs, and provide a better over all vehicle for the urban driver.