Because the Ridgeline only comes in a crew cab, and therefore we would be comparing it apples-to-apples. Also, most of the interest in the mid-size segment is with crew cabs.
Actually, I would restrict it to 4WD/AWD mid-size crew cabs.
How was the ride and handling in the SportTrac? We've seen Ford trucks with IRS in the past (a good thing), and they've been better than solid axle, but still not on par with many similar set-ups. Just curious to know if Ford got the balance right this time.
I think another thread comparing the long bed versions of the mid-size class would be a good thing. But I think the buyers interested in those are not going to have the same criteria as those interested in a crew cab/short bed. Crew cabs tend to sell to the guy with a family and some odd jobs to do. Long beds will sell to singles with jobs that require a truck, or a hobby which requires a truck.
For those who use their trucks for off roading that’s more extreme than dirt roads, but without all the serious aftermarket stuff that you see meaning stock versions here are the stock vehicles in this class that I have seen all doing quite well. The Toyota TRD, Frontier NISMO, and the Dodge Dakota I haven’t seen the mid size Chevys or Fords. But that does not make them bad choices. To buy a truck to take off road the list of necessary features that a truck needs is fairly straight forward and to make sure that it is stock from the manufacturer.
1. A strong frame it’s going to take a pounding with the stuff underneath tucked up above the frame. 2. Skid plates oil pan, transfer case, and gas tank. Note some stock plates are wimpy. 3. Great shocks and tires that are trail rated meaning not just deep tread, but also reinforce sidewalls. 4. Attachment point’s front and back so you can be pulled out when stuck. On the rear if you have a class III hitch that’s attached to the frame a shackle attachment will do, never use the tow ball. 5. Ground clearance better than 9 inches. 6. Side mirrors that can be turned inwards to prevent them from being whacked off. 7. Lots of torque and a locking rear differential also great brakes 8. A good source of parts and service for the things that you are going to break.
After that it really comes down to what you like and don’t like and prices that’s going to guide you in making your choice as to what truck to buy. I’m very sure that there’s more to add to the list oh well. One thing to note all these trucks have longer wheelbases so it makes tight turns more of a problem, so if you expect to go on switchbacks and steep angles you may need a shorter wheelbase rig.
I could have when I created it, but I figured (as did the host) that people shopping these trucks could figure this out and make the forum into what they wanted it to be. Like I've said before, create your own to suit your liking if this one bothers you, but for now, let's drop the subject, since the forum won't be changing (unless a host sees it as necessary, and since the host helped me set this up, I assume they think it is adequate.)
Here is my handling review of the vehicles I have ridden:
Ridgeline: By far the best to drive, very similar to my Accord and a blast to drive.
NISMO Frontier: I think athletic has been used to describe this, I agree. Fast but not as secure as the Ridgeline.
Sport Trac: The best word to me was substantial, kind of what I would imagine driving a big Cadillac would be like. Not a lot of body lean, a very secure and safe feeling vehicle to drive. Not sure thats good. Now I only drove the 6 with 210 horses, waiting to drive the 8 at 290. The 6 was quicker then I expected.
Tacoma, Non TRD: Like it the least. Felt like I was driving on a ball, a disconnected, floaty feeling. It was a little unnerving, like I had a bad sense of the road.
I still think the Sport Trac should be added. It is a unique vehicle unlike some of the others suggested and would bring something to the mix, splitting the difference between the Ridge and the off-road brothers. Creating a new one with these vehicles and adding the Trac doesn't make sense, it would be redundant. I understand why it wasn't initially added, it wasn't available, but people are now buying them and I think their comments would be helpful to anyone like me looking to purchase a vehicle in this segment. Adding it to the title should not be that hard, nor would it alter what this is all about, just IMO enhance it while keeping the total number of Forums on the sight down.
Talk to the host about that; I can't change it once I've created it. I agree, the new sporttrac would be a better contender in here than most other places.
Host, a little help, if possible?
BTW, to the comment about adding the Raider; I originally added just one of the GM twins since both of them are the same, but the host thought it would be good to include both, and that's fine. I think, though, that if there hasn't been ANY (please point out a debate-chat including the Dakota in depth) talk on the Dakota, that the adding the Raider would be kind of pointless.
Suggest you do a little more research before committing to the SportTrac. Fortunately, many websites and magazines have already done that. The consensus is usually Ridgeline, Frontier, Tacoma. Sometimes Tacoma finishes ahead of Frontier. IIRC the new Sport Trac was limited off-road by its lack of ground clearance. Tacoma and Frontier are both in the 9-10+ inch range.
Given that you can't accept the looks on the Ridgeline, that would leave Tacoma or Frontier. You like the hp/torque ratings on Sport Trac. I think you'll be surprised at how the 6's in Frontier and Tacoma outperform the 8 in Sport Trac, and with better fuel mileage to boot. Granted, Tacoma recommends premium for that level of performance. For power/torque/fuel economy/octane, you'll have a tough time beating Frontier.
There are a lot better aftermarket choices for bedcovers for all these trucks that will still allow you to use the bed extender. I say the aftermarket is better because there is more variety, and they are cheaper. For example, Honda's cover for the Ridgeline is very expensive and not watertight. For my Frontier, I have a Truxedo for less than half the cost of Nissan's tonneau. Truxedo is a locking, roll-up cover that converts to full use of the bed in about 10 seconds. You want to preserve the full bed with any of these trucks because they are only 5' (or less) to begin with.
I share your concern about wet weather traction. Nissan accomplishes this with 4-wheel limited slip and a stability system. Whichever truck you buy, go find a wet parking lot or dirt road and try doing donuts to see how well the truck actually does. Another easy test is to start from a dead stop and floor it while turning. Without some sort of traction control, the rear end will break loose. With traction control or auto-4wd on, it should stay in control.
IIRC Nissan comes with both XM and Sirius to satisfy everyone, which seems like pretty smart marketing.
Anyway, there's my 2.5 cents. If I didn't off-road, I'd have the Ridgeline despite its looks, which are at least better than an Aztek. Because I off-road, I have the Frontier.
While cross shopping these HARD lately I couldn't help but notice the following facts:
1. Honda's Ridgeline cargo capacity REQUIRES you to carry ~500lbs. of it IN THE CAB. :mad: No other truck manufacturers literature requires this. Follow the asterisks...it's true.
2. Dodge's Dakota is now offering impressive packages like the R/T w/ the High Output V8 now readily available and on dealers lots! If towing is in the cards, a V8 is a must. Unfortunately, I also noticed you could option EITHER the sunroof OR the SIA's. NOT both!
3. Toyota's Tacoma lacks availability of a sunroof, leather seating w/power adjustments, heated seats & outside mirrors, XM radio, OnStar, etc... all of which are readily available on the Chevy Colorado/GMC Canyon! :surprise: Hard to believe the Taco is 7 inches wider as well. Must admit the owners posting they had to add plates & eye hooks from underneath the bed (in order to securely tie down their cycles) makes me question the plastic bed. :mad:
4. Loaded Nissan Frontier's and Ridgeline's are definitely impressive, but pricing seems somewhat out of line. A plain jane Ridgeline (with steel wheels for $28,300!) is a humble site to be sure. A loaded one at $40,000+ on the window sticker can certainly give you pause.
5. The Nissan's cargo bed is VERY short & small. So is the cargo capacity and low fuel mileage. Nice motor though. Rear seast is definitely a short term affair unless you are cruel.
So, I'm still researching and riding the fence. NONE of these trucks in V6 guise gets appreciably better fuel economy than a GM full sizer. 4 banger would be needed to justify the mileage argument. And the Ridgeline/Tacoma/Dakota size uptick & proud pricing forces you to consider why you aren't getting a capable and comfy full sizer!?!? :sick:
I'm hoping a diesel version of one of these will change my mind. Time will tell. GM is definitely putting a diesel into the H3 and actual US Colorado test sitings suggest it's just a matter of time. Can I wait that long? Will Toyota release a mid size diesel first? Or will Jeep leapfrog them all with the new diesel Gladiator?
I do not really like the looks of the Ridgeline but I would not call it ugly. My definition of ugly is the early plastic slab sided Azteks. Now that is UGLY.
My sister is looking at a Ridgeline and I think it is the best choice for her.
I notice that the GM's version of a small truck gets very little discussion. Granted it's no benchmark, but for the money doesn't it suffice? Neighbor just both z-71 crew cab w/ most all the goodies under 20-k. The money difference was almost $5700.00 verses a Pre-runner. For the money, I think it's okay. However, someone plueeeze tell GM to lose the I-5 for a 6 cyl.
GM did make a big mistake putting in the I-5 engine in the Colorado/Canyon. They had planned on putting in the v6 from the envoy which has over 280hp+ but at the time the I-5(same engine as the envoy minus one cylinder) was enough power to outdo the competition. I bet if GM would of put in the v6 into the colorado & canyon, it would probably be the best selling compact right now.
GM did make a big mistake putting in the I-5 engine in the Colorado/Canyon. They had planned on putting in the v6 from the envoy which has over 280hp+ but at the time the I-5(same engine as the envoy minus one cylinder) was enough power to outdo the competition. I bet if GM would of put in the v6 into the colorado & canyon, it would probably be the best selling compact right now.
It's actually an Inline-6, which would likely be smoother (inline engines are smoother than vees) than the V-6s offered by the other companies.
I must say I have been impressed with the Nissan. As for reviews on the trac, none of them that cover these vehicles had the trac in the mix. The redesign was not out yet. Its clearly less capable than Nissan and Toyota, lacking the clearance you mentioned and lockers. However, I'd venture to say it is more capable then the Ridge due to its low gear. I think it has slightly more clearance and has some small skid plates.
With the truxedo, can you use the utility trac?
Nissan's 4 wheel limited slip is only when 4WD is engaged, correct? That seems to be less practical on every day roads as compared to Fords full time system.
By the way, test drove the 8 today. This one was leather with a charcoal interior. The interior is much nicer in that color. The 8 did well, not as quick as the Nissan, but good. I find that with Ford Trucks. The F-150 is like that also, good HP but not the quickest. I guess they gear them that way to help towing.
I still am leaning toward the trac. It has also been awarded 5 stars on frontal and side, like the Ridge. The other thing I wondered when driving the Nissan was how it would do on a long trip. I sensed it may get uncomfortable after awhile. The power seats on the trac were very comfortable.
Checked out Truxedo. Its a soft cover, good for covering things but not all that secure. The Ford cover is hard and costs only 595. Its split so you can open it from the back seat via the window or from the back of the cab. You can also take it off easily. It really is a great design.
One of my biggest concerns about the Ridgeline was its off road capability. As I thought about it though, I realized after spending close to 30,000 on a new vehicle I wasn't about to do any serious off roading with it for fear that if I broke anything on it I was w/o wheels and my wife would rightfully put me on the coach for a long time. For that kind of stuff it would be far better to get a used Jeep not worry about any damage to it.
"...I can get most anything I want on either level of Sport Trac..."
Looks like I'm replying to my own post.
The Big 3 are putting all types of bells and whistles on their vehicles to make an attempt to regain the share of sales lost to the "Foreign Makers".
Gadgets don't make a vehicle reliable! Gadgets don't result in higher resale/trade values.
The Rice Burners are not really any less expensive than the American made. People are just willing to pay the price to get a reliable car.
FWIW: Ford has been plagued with Automatic Tranny problems for many years. Including F150 based and Ranger based, as well as Escapes and Tributes. My 85 year old mom has had the tranny in her Explorer replaced by Ford twice in 93000 miles. First one was covered under a warranty. She had to pay for the 2nd.
Sorry, I was unclear. I was referring to those SUVs...he said they had V-6s, I was referring to THOSE that have Inline engines (I-6 - 275 hp). The Colorado has that engine with one cylinder lopped off (I-5 - 220 hp).
My clarity suffers after 11 PM apparently. Cya later!
1. Honda's Ridgeline cargo capacity REQUIRES you to carry ~500lbs. of it IN THE CAB. No other truck manufacturers literature requires this. Follow the asterisks...it's true.
The other manufacturer's have the same policy, they just don't list it on their spec sheets. Follow their asterisks and you'll find them telling you to decrease payload capacity when you add passengers. (Passengers are supposed to ride in the cab, right?)
For example, here is the disclaimer used on Toyota's site (emphasis added).
Payload is the GVWR minus curb weight and includes weight of occupants, optional equipment and cargo, limited by weight distribution. Payload is not the Vehicle Capacity Weight as defined by FMVSS 110, which will vary according to installed optional equipment.
Honda is just upfront about it. And it's 400 lbs, by the way. Toyota mentions weight distribution, but doesn't give a number. You'd probably have to dig into the owners manual to find it.
1. Honda's Ridgeline cargo capacity REQUIRES you to carry ~500lbs. of it IN THE CAB. No other truck manufacturers literature requires this. Follow the asterisks...it's true.
The other manufacturer's have the same policy, they just don't list it on their spec sheets. Follow their asterisks and you'll find them telling you to decrease payload capacity when you add passengers. (Passengers are supposed to ride in the cab, right?)
For example, here is the disclaimer used on Toyota's site (emphasis added).
Payload is the GVWR minus curb weight and includes weight of occupants, optional equipment and cargo, limited by weight distribution. Payload is not the Vehicle Capacity Weight as defined by FMVSS 110, which will vary according to installed optional equipment.
Honda is just upfront about it. And it's 400 lbs, by the way. Toyota mentions weight distribution, but doesn't give a number. You'd probably have to dig into the owners manual to find it.
From what I read in the post, you can haul the full load capacity in the Honda ONLY if 500 of the weight is in the cab. The others include the cab weight in the capacity also, but you can put the 500 in the cab or the bed, or the trailer. If that is true, then the Honda really has a 4500 pound CARGO/trailer carrying capacity compared to something which can carry 6500. 2000 is actually a big difference, damn near 45%.
Because any discussion involving a Colorado will show up on the Colorado threads. Every car involved here will show up on their respective boards. It's not something I control or choose.
Just like the Accord vs. Camry board, that particular discussion shows up on BOTH threads. That way, any Camry buyer interested in a comparison with another car can find it easily.
Every manufacturer, when giving towing limits, are assuming only a driver. Thats why 4X4 models have less capacity then 2WD, because of extra weight. Thats why I think Honda is a little short at 5,000. 4 Guys and gear can easily weigh in at 1,000 lbs, if traveling light. If not you may be only able to tow 3500 lbs. Thats why I think 6,000 + is a good number.
incorrect again bud. An 06 "I-6" Envoy has 291hp... you probably are using a late models torque ratings as HP..
Either way its a nice amount of power for a 6 cylinder engine which gets good mpg 16/22 for a 4x2 version and 15/22 for a 4x4. Again GM should of put this engine into their midsizers. but then again who needs 290+hp for a midsized truck?
Sorry, I was going by the latest article I had read (which was in a 2005 issue, like you said. I don't follow GM trucks enough to know all the little details). Thanks for correcting me; either way, 275 or 291 is good power.
Not trying to be rude, Ustazzaf, but please read the Toyota disclaimer again.
Payload is the GVWR minus curb weight and includes weight of occupants, optional equipment and cargo, limited by weight distribution. Payload is not the Vehicle Capacity Weight as defined by FMVSS 110, which will vary according to installed optional equipment. - from Tacoma specs.
Note that it includes weight distribution as a limiting factor.
If you wanted to make the case that others can haul more in the bed than the Ridgeline, you would want to look at the Gross Real Axle Weight Rating (GRAWR) for the vehicles.
Which is something I've already done. The Ridgeline is competitive.
Unfortunately, Toyota does not list that information on their website. If someone wants to check the door jamb for a Double Cab Taco 4X4, we can get that.
1. I was responding to a post regarding payload capacity, not towing capacity.
2. Most manufacturer's publish towing capacities based on a single occupant. Honda does not. Their towing capacity for the Ridgeline assumes two occupants and 200 lbs of gear. Here's a direct quote from their literature.
"Industry practice is to boast a high maximum tow rating, even though some sacrifice of passengers and cargo may be necessary to suitably accommodate such a trailer load - in some cases limiting the vehicle to one passenger to accommodate the maximum specified towing capacity. The Ridgeline's 5,000-pound rating is calculated to include up to two passengers and 200 pounds of cargo."
That's 350 lbs that must be subtracted from a competitor's ratings to make an even comparison with the Ridgeline. Obviously, trucks like the Taco, Frontier, and Dakota will still tow more than the Ridge. It's just that the difference isn't as great as their spec sheets would have you believe... until you read the fine print.
Side note: The Pilot is rated with four passengers plus gear. So Honda did have to make some concessions to the way the industry operates.
You said "Because any discussion involving a Colorado will show up on the Colorado threads." Wow what a revelation that was. :P
Uh ya....That certainly would be the place I would think to look for it. However it never crossed my mind to look under one of the rice burners for comparison information on the Colorado. But thanks for the insight :confuse:
Look, you asked why the Honda would show up on the Chevy thread. Well, look around your Chevy threads. Anywhere a comparison is made, other cars will be.
"Are you caying that the Pilot can tow the max 3500 lbs, even if it's carrying 4 people and gear?"
That is what Honda is saying. Here's a direct quote.
"While conventional towing capacity figures boast a high maximum tow rating, even though some sacrifice of passengers and cargo may be necessary to suitably accommodate maximum loads, the Pilot's 3,500/4,500-pound rating is calculated to include up to four passengers and their cargo."
Here's the website. Scroll to the bottom for the section on towing.
Well, my sister bought her new Honda Ridgeline this past weekend and she is thrilled with it. I have not seen it yet, but this is the truck that I recommended she get.
She does not do any off road driving, nor does she do any towing. I'll see her in a few weeks and then I'll get to see it and compare it closely to my Frontier.
I am far from an expert, but my interpetation is that the Honda says it can have a total carrying capicity cargo/cabin/trailer of 5000 pounds, 500 of which MUST be in the cabin. The others do not specify that a certain weight must be in the cabin. Therefore, I can tow a 4500 pound trailer with A 5K capicity Honda, but I can carry a 6500 pound trailer if the other truck has a 6500 cargo/cabin/towing capacity because I don't have to carry anything but the driver in the cabin. Am I missing something?
I don't think it is saying that you must have 500# in the cabin before you can tow a trailer. :confuse:
From the web site above:
To help ensure that customers will be able to move a maximum rated load up a grade from rest (such as pulling a loaded boat trailer up a launch ramp), engineers sought out some of the most challenging entry roads and launch ramps in the country. Testing verifies the Pilot's ability to handle a 17-degree (31-percent) grade on mountain roads approaching Lake Cumberland in southern Kentucky and a 15-degree (27-percent) grade at 5,280-foot elevation at Lake Tahoe. A note in the Pilot's owner's manual suggests reducing gross combined weight 2-percent for every 1,000 feet of elevation. At sea level, the Pilot can tow a 4,500-pound boat and four passengers up an 18-degree (32-percent) slope.
With many vehicles they will give a maximum trailer weight but say that that weight should be reduced if cabin weight increases.
Example:
Gross combined weight for truck and trailer might be 10,000#. Let's say the truck weight is 5000 and tow capacity 5000. Any weight added to the truck should reduce an equal amount of weight from the trailer to maintain that 10,000 # maximum weight. It isn't unusual to read that a crew cab of a certain model is rated to tow a lighter trailer than a standard model with the same drive train. The crew cab is heavier so the trailer needs to be lighter to maintain that Gross combined weight.
Honda is saying the Pilot will pull a 4500# boat while carrying 4 passengers!!
In the case of the Pilot the maximum weight of the trailer would probably remain the same even if the cabin load was only 1 person. It has to do with the Pilot being primarily a front wheel drive under a unitized body. It is not sitting on a heavy steel frame like the Ridgeline or other trucks. The hitch is attached to a sub structure that is not as strong as a heavy steel frame would be.
If this is not correct, someone will correct it! :shades:
I was talking about the Ridgeline. I didn't mean you had to have 500 pounds in the cabin to tow a trailer. What I meant was (refering to a previous post) that in order to carry the full 5K that the Ridge is rated at, 500 pounds must be in the cabin. It can only tow/haul in the bed a total of 4500. I have never seen another vehicle that required part of the load to be in the cabin. I realize that for every pound in the cabin, the towing capacity is decreased on all vehicles. I have not seen official documentation that Honda states a 5K towing capacity with asteriks stating 500 of the 5K must be in the cabin. I don't see it being true because Honda would look stupid if it were true. I was just clearing up (trying to) what someone else said.
Nissan's 4 wheel limited slip is only when 4WD is engaged, correct? That seems to be less practical on every day roads as compared to Fords full time system.
I still am leaning toward the trac. It has also been awarded 5 stars on frontal and side, like the Ridge. The other thing I wondered when driving the Nissan was how it would do on a long trip. I sensed it may get uncomfortable after awhile. The power seats on the trac were very comfortable."
Truxedo does not interfere with the util-track.
Nissan's 4-wheel limited slip is always engaged. However, in 2wd it will only be active on the rear, since that is all that is powered. Do a full-throttle turning start in the Nissan and the system will reduce power and apply brake as necessary to the inside rear to keep traction.
I agree that power seats offer the most comfort. The driver's seat in my Frontier has the same adjustments as a power seat (independently raise and lower the front and rear sections of the cushion, lumbar, etc.), but they are done manually, which in the long run might prove to be more reliable anyway. With 24,000 miles per year I've obviously done long days in the Frontier, and they have been comfortable.
Let's start by putting some real numbers into the discussion.
The total max payload for Ridgeline is either 1549, 1558, or 1554 lbs depending on which model you look at. It varies because of things like accessories and such will add weight. The same is true of every other truck on the market.
The max bed payload (amount of weight to be hauled in the truck bed) is 1,100 lbs. Meaning that 454 lbs must be stored in the cab.
The same is true for every other truck. We just don't know what the exact numbers are. The manufacturers simply don't list the data on their websites. Instead, they have a vague disclaimer telling you that adjustments must be made.
Notice that I have not yet mentioned towing? That's because the 454 lbs in question has nothing to do with towing. It's a restriction on payload. Not the same thing.
The towing capacity of the Ridgeline is 5,000 lbs with 2 occupants and 200 lbs of gear in the vehicle. Others, which list higher towing capacities, do not include any weight except a driver.
I'm not sure that a 1:1 ratio is needed when calculating vehicle weight and towing wight combined. But if that is true, then a truck with a 6,000 lb capacity really has a capacity of only a 5,650 lbs once you add the passenger and cargo that is part of the Ridgeline's measure.
I am far from an expert, but my interpetation is that the Honda says it can have a total carrying capicity cargo/cabin/trailer of 5000 pounds, 500 of which MUST be in the cabin.
I would agree with the interpretation that that leaves only 4500 lbs for towing a trailer, BEFORE vehicle fluids and accessory weights have also been subtracted from the rating. In other words, it's actually lower than 4500 lbs.
Subtracting passenger and vehicle fluid weights from quoted maximum payload (or when figuring tow capacity) is standard. But the requirement to carry 500 lbs in the cab to offset a heavy cargo in the bed is not the case with any other truck that I know if.
Honda probably requires the 500 lbs in front to keep enough weight over the front axle when carrying (or towing) a heavy load in back.
Why not so with other trucks? BECAUSE THE RIDGELINE IS NOT A REAR-WHEEL DRIVE TRUCK. It's not a true AWD, either. From what I read, it is a FRONT-WHEEL DRIVE vehicle with pseudo-AWD. At no point are both axles driving simultanously.
Putting a heavy load in the rear of a front-wheel drive vehicle is bad news. Especially a front-wheel drive vehicle with a soft suspension such as the Ridgeline. The front becomes partly unweighted. There goes your traction. There goes your steering.
My interpretation for the 500 lb requirement is that (a) it helps keep maintain traction with the front wheels, and (b) it keeps the vehicle from breaking the rear springs, which by the way are coils, not leafs.
I'm sure the Ridgeline fits many people's preferences and lifestyles. But it's really a giant passenger car, not a truck.
Honda probably requires the 500 lbs in front to keep enough weight over the front axle when carrying (or towing) a heavy load in back.
Yeah right! Good one!
So a RL owner leaves his house to go get a maximum load for the bed. On the way he picks up a couple of friends to have 500# in the truck. Where in the truck do they have to be?
Should they all be in the front seat to keep more weight over the front axle?
So they get the 1500+ # in the bed. On the way home he drops the 2 friends off. How much of the load should he remove, to meet hauling requirements, before he continues on ?
That could sure get complicated.
I believe that Honda is simply stating that it will carry the 1500+ # and 500# of passengers and stuff. However, with or without the 500# up front the bed weight capacity probably remains the 1500+ #.
1500# is not all that much. Coil springs can easily handle it. Look at the load a Golf cart carries, when 4 golfers are aboard.
I have tested the following vehicles, all 4X4 crew cabs, all road driving. Here is my comparison.
07 Sport Trac, V8 Limited 06 Honda Ridgeline, RTL 06 Nissan Frontier, NISMO 06 Tacoma, non-TRD (TRD not on the lot) 06 Dodge DakotaTRX4 Laramie
Here is my analysis and order of preference: To start, the Trac and Ridgeline are in a different league from the rest. Now, if heavy off roading is a requirement, then that would put them below the Nissan and Toyota. 1. Sport Trac Depending on what an owner uses their vehicle for, the Ridgeline could easily be in the #1 spot. BLUF: Greatly improved driving while retaining truck capabilities. I put the Trac first for the following reasons: a. Can tow 1400 lbs more b. Has a low gear for better off roading c. Fully boxed frame d. I can order a sunroof on any trim level, with the Honda I have to get leather also or spend big bucks on after market. e. More and better exterior color choices. f. Exterior is the best in the group (the main reason my wife wouldn't let me buy a Ridge) g. The tonneau cover/ bed extender is a great combination Minuses: - Not thrilled with the interior design/ the tan and grey interior. Wish charcoal was offered in the XLT.
2. Ridgeline BLUF: A Honda Accord with a truck bed and towing capability a. This vehicle is the most fun to drive. Quick and nimble while the Trac feels a little less nimble, a little more like driving a Cadillac. b. Honda quality c. The trunk is a fabulous feature, I can think of a 1,000 uses. The Trac's Tonneau/ bed extender is almost as good, except I can't have a "trunk" securing camping gear and bikes on top in the bed like I could with the Ridge. Minuses: - Not sure 5,000 lbs is enough - Not sure it has enough off road capability - Looks - Sirius not offered at the dealership ( I prefer it over XM, which is all you can get at Honda) - Have to get leather with Moon Roof - Rims are uglier then the truck
3. Nissan: a. The best of the solid axles to drive b. Great Off-raod capability c. Second best looking truck in the group d. Rear seat bottom flips up or the back flips down e. Cargo system in the back Minuses: -Full time 4WD not available, had quite a bit of tail spin while driving on dry roads -I can't get the bed flexibility I can get with the Trac or Ridge. Tonnaue covers would intefer with utili trac in the bed. Also, covers are not easily removable like they are on the trac. Its either an open, unsecured bed or a closed bed. -I have to go after market for a rear slider. -No heating/cooling vents for rear passengers
4. Toyota a. Nicest interior in the bunch b. Best fuel economy, I believe even with mid-grade gas money is saved compared to the Nissan. c. Great off-road capability (not sure wich is better, Nissan or Toyota) Minuses: - I did not like the driving experience at all. I felt like I was driving on a bubble, not connected to the road. It was alittle unnerving. Perhaps the TRD would change that. -Because of the cab roof shape I can not get a moon roof. -Full time 4WD not available -I can't get the bed flexibility I can get with the Trac or Ridge. Tonnaue covers would intefer with utili trac in the bed. Also, covers are not easily removable like they are on the trac. Its either an open, unsecured bed or a closed bed. -I have to go after market for a rear slider.
Dodge: 1. Ordering flexibility (amount of options available for different trims) 2. Full time 4WD available, did not test it Minuses: -Worse of the grouip -Interior just a little more appealing then the Chevy Colorado -Worse engine of the bumch -I can't get the bed flexibility I can get with the Trac or Ridge. Tonnaue covers would intefer with utili trac in the bed. Also, covers are not easily removable like they are on the trac. Its either an open, unsecured bed or a closed bed. -I have to go after market for a rear slider.
I am almost certain the ABLS (Active Brake Limited Slip) on the 4WD Frontier is only engaged when in 4-wheel drive. On 2WD models, I believe it is always 'on.'
"I believe that Honda is simply stating that it will carry the 1500+ # and 500# of passengers and stuff. However, with or without the 500# up front the bed weight capacity probably remains the 1500+ #."
No. Honda simply states that the bed capacity is 1,100 lbs. The TOTAL max payload is 1550ish with 450ish in the cab.
Once again, this is no different than any other truck, except that the others don't publish that little factoid.
And I'm still waiting for someone to explain to me what Payload restrictions have to do with Towing capacity. Or do we have a few posters who need to have the difference explained to them?
Comments
Actually, I would restrict it to 4WD/AWD mid-size crew cabs.
Bob
How was the ride and handling in the SportTrac? We've seen Ford trucks with IRS in the past (a good thing), and they've been better than solid axle, but still not on par with many similar set-ups. Just curious to know if Ford got the balance right this time.
1. A strong frame it’s going to take a pounding with the stuff underneath tucked up above the frame.
2. Skid plates oil pan, transfer case, and gas tank. Note some stock plates are wimpy.
3. Great shocks and tires that are trail rated meaning not just deep tread, but also reinforce sidewalls.
4. Attachment point’s front and back so you can be pulled out when stuck. On the rear if you have a class III hitch that’s attached to the frame a shackle attachment will do, never use the tow ball.
5. Ground clearance better than 9 inches.
6. Side mirrors that can be turned inwards to prevent them from being whacked off.
7. Lots of torque and a locking rear differential also great brakes
8. A good source of parts and service for the things that you are going to break.
After that it really comes down to what you like and don’t like and prices that’s going to guide you in making your choice as to what truck to buy. I’m very sure that there’s more to add to the list oh well. One thing to note all these trucks have longer wheelbases so it makes tight turns more of a problem, so if you expect to go on switchbacks and steep angles you may need a shorter wheelbase rig.
Cheers
I suppose we should. Though, it's essentially a rebadged Dakota and the Dakota is included.
Ridgeline: By far the best to drive, very similar to my Accord and a blast to drive.
NISMO Frontier: I think athletic has been used to describe this, I agree. Fast but not as secure as the Ridgeline.
Sport Trac: The best word to me was substantial, kind of what I would imagine driving a big Cadillac would be like. Not a lot of body lean, a very secure and safe feeling vehicle to drive. Not sure thats good. Now I only drove the 6 with 210 horses, waiting to drive the 8 at 290. The 6 was quicker then I expected.
Tacoma, Non TRD: Like it the least. Felt like I was driving on a ball, a disconnected, floaty feeling. It was a little unnerving, like I had a bad sense of the road.
Hope this helps.
Host, a little help, if possible?
BTW, to the comment about adding the Raider; I originally added just one of the GM twins since both of them are the same, but the host thought it would be good to include both, and that's fine. I think, though, that if there hasn't been ANY (please point out a debate-chat including the Dakota in depth) talk on the Dakota, that the adding the Raider would be kind of pointless.
Given that you can't accept the looks on the Ridgeline, that would leave Tacoma or Frontier. You like the hp/torque ratings on Sport Trac. I think you'll be surprised at how the 6's in Frontier and Tacoma outperform the 8 in Sport Trac, and with better fuel mileage to boot. Granted, Tacoma recommends premium for that level of performance. For power/torque/fuel economy/octane, you'll have a tough time beating Frontier.
There are a lot better aftermarket choices for bedcovers for all these trucks that will still allow you to use the bed extender. I say the aftermarket is better because there is more variety, and they are cheaper. For example, Honda's cover for the Ridgeline is very expensive and not watertight. For my Frontier, I have a Truxedo for less than half the cost of Nissan's tonneau. Truxedo is a locking, roll-up cover that converts to full use of the bed in about 10 seconds. You want to preserve the full bed with any of these trucks because they are only 5' (or less) to begin with.
I share your concern about wet weather traction. Nissan accomplishes this with 4-wheel limited slip and a stability system. Whichever truck you buy, go find a wet parking lot or dirt road and try doing donuts to see how well the truck actually does. Another easy test is to start from a dead stop and floor it while turning. Without some sort of traction control, the rear end will break loose. With traction control or auto-4wd on, it should stay in control.
IIRC Nissan comes with both XM and Sirius to satisfy everyone, which seems like pretty smart marketing.
Anyway, there's my 2.5 cents. If I didn't off-road, I'd have the Ridgeline despite its looks, which are at least better than an Aztek. Because I off-road, I have the Frontier.
1. Honda's Ridgeline cargo capacity REQUIRES you to carry ~500lbs. of it IN THE CAB. :mad: No other truck manufacturers literature requires this. Follow the asterisks...it's true.
2. Dodge's Dakota is now offering impressive packages like the R/T w/ the High Output V8 now readily available and on dealers lots! If towing is in the cards, a V8 is a must. Unfortunately, I also noticed you could option EITHER the sunroof OR the SIA's. NOT both!
3. Toyota's Tacoma lacks availability of a sunroof, leather seating w/power adjustments, heated seats & outside mirrors, XM radio, OnStar, etc... all of which are readily available on the Chevy Colorado/GMC Canyon! :surprise: Hard to believe the Taco is 7 inches wider as well. Must admit the owners posting they had to add plates & eye hooks from underneath the bed (in order to securely tie down their cycles) makes me question the plastic bed. :mad:
4. Loaded Nissan Frontier's and Ridgeline's are definitely impressive, but pricing seems somewhat out of line. A plain jane Ridgeline (with steel wheels for $28,300!) is a humble site to be sure. A loaded one at $40,000+ on the window sticker can certainly give you pause.
5. The Nissan's cargo bed is VERY short & small. So is the cargo capacity and low fuel mileage. Nice motor though. Rear seast is definitely a short term affair unless you are cruel.
So, I'm still researching and riding the fence. NONE of these trucks in V6 guise gets appreciably better fuel economy than a GM full sizer. 4 banger would be needed to justify the mileage argument. And the Ridgeline/Tacoma/Dakota size uptick & proud pricing forces you to consider why you aren't getting a capable and comfy full sizer!?!? :sick:
I'm hoping a diesel version of one of these will change my mind. Time will tell. GM is definitely putting a diesel into the H3 and actual US Colorado test sitings suggest it's just a matter of time. Can I wait that long? Will Toyota release a mid size diesel first? Or will Jeep leapfrog them all with the new diesel Gladiator?
but I would not call it ugly. My definition of ugly is the early plastic slab sided Azteks.
Now that is UGLY.
My sister is looking at a Ridgeline and I think it is the best choice for her.
OkieScot
It's actually an Inline-6, which would likely be smoother (inline engines are smoother than vees) than the V-6s offered by the other companies.
As for reviews on the trac, none of them that cover these vehicles had the trac in the mix. The redesign was not out yet. Its clearly less capable than Nissan and Toyota, lacking the clearance you mentioned and lockers. However, I'd venture to say it is more capable then the Ridge due to its low gear. I think it has slightly more clearance and has some small skid plates.
With the truxedo, can you use the utility trac?
Nissan's 4 wheel limited slip is only when 4WD is engaged, correct? That seems to be less practical on every day roads as compared to Fords full time system.
By the way, test drove the 8 today. This one was leather with a charcoal interior. The interior is much nicer in that color. The 8 did well, not as quick as the Nissan, but good. I find that with Ford Trucks. The F-150 is like that also, good HP but not the quickest. I guess they gear them that way to help towing.
I still am leaning toward the trac. It has also been awarded 5 stars on frontal and side, like the Ridge. The other thing I wondered when driving the Nissan was how it would do on a long trip. I sensed it may get uncomfortable after awhile. The power seats on the trac were very comfortable.
The Ford cover is hard and costs only 595. Its split so you can open it from the back seat via the window or from the back of the cab. You can also take it off easily. It really is a great design.
Looks like I'm replying to my own post.
The Big 3 are putting all types of bells and whistles on their vehicles to make an attempt to regain the share of sales lost to the "Foreign Makers".
Gadgets don't make a vehicle reliable! Gadgets don't result in higher resale/trade values.
The Rice Burners are not really any less expensive than the American made. People are just willing to pay the price to get a reliable car.
FWIW: Ford has been plagued with Automatic Tranny problems for many years. Including F150 based and Ranger based, as well as Escapes and Tributes. My 85 year old mom has had the tranny in her Explorer replaced by Ford twice in 93000 miles. First one was covered under a warranty. She had to pay for the 2nd.
Our last Big 3 vehicle was a 98 Dodge Ram.
We gonna stick with the Rice Burners for a while.
Move over Rover!
Japan has paid their dues. Now they reap the profits.
I say good on ya'!
My clarity suffers after 11 PM apparently. Cya later!
1. Honda's Ridgeline cargo capacity REQUIRES you to carry ~500lbs. of it IN THE CAB. No other truck manufacturers literature requires this. Follow the asterisks...it's true.
The other manufacturer's have the same policy, they just don't list it on their spec sheets. Follow their asterisks and you'll find them telling you to decrease payload capacity when you add passengers. (Passengers are supposed to ride in the cab, right?)
For example, here is the disclaimer used on Toyota's site (emphasis added).
Payload is the GVWR minus curb weight and includes weight of occupants, optional equipment and cargo, limited by weight distribution. Payload is not the Vehicle Capacity Weight as defined by FMVSS 110, which will vary according to installed optional equipment.
Honda is just upfront about it. And it's 400 lbs, by the way. Toyota mentions weight distribution, but doesn't give a number. You'd probably have to dig into the owners manual to find it.
The other manufacturer's have the same policy, they just don't list it on their spec sheets. Follow their asterisks and you'll find them telling you to decrease payload capacity when you add passengers. (Passengers are supposed to ride in the cab, right?)
For example, here is the disclaimer used on Toyota's site (emphasis added).
Payload is the GVWR minus curb weight and includes weight of occupants, optional equipment and cargo, limited by weight distribution. Payload is not the Vehicle Capacity Weight as defined by FMVSS 110, which will vary according to installed optional equipment.
Honda is just upfront about it. And it's 400 lbs, by the way. Toyota mentions weight distribution, but doesn't give a number. You'd probably have to dig into the owners manual to find it.
From what I read in the post, you can haul the full load capacity in the Honda ONLY if 500 of the weight is in the cab. The others include the cab weight in the capacity also, but you can put the 500 in the cab or the bed, or the trailer. If that is true, then the Honda really has a 4500 pound CARGO/trailer carrying capacity compared to something which can carry 6500. 2000 is actually a big difference, damn near 45%.
Just like the Accord vs. Camry board, that particular discussion shows up on BOTH threads. That way, any Camry buyer interested in a comparison with another car can find it easily.
Either way its a nice amount of power for a 6 cylinder engine which gets good mpg 16/22 for a 4x2 version and 15/22 for a 4x4. Again GM should of put this engine into their midsizers. but then again who needs 290+hp for a midsized truck?
Payload is the GVWR minus curb weight and includes weight of occupants, optional equipment and cargo, limited by weight distribution. Payload is not the Vehicle Capacity Weight as defined by FMVSS 110, which will vary according to installed optional equipment. - from Tacoma specs.
Note that it includes weight distribution as a limiting factor.
If you wanted to make the case that others can haul more in the bed than the Ridgeline, you would want to look at the Gross Real Axle Weight Rating (GRAWR) for the vehicles.
Which is something I've already done. The Ridgeline is competitive.
Colorado = 2,896 lbs
Sport Trac = 3,200 lbs
Ridgeline = 3,252 lbs
Frontier = 3265 lbs
Dakota = 3,600 lbs
Unfortunately, Toyota does not list that information on their website. If someone wants to check the door jamb for a Double Cab Taco 4X4, we can get that.
2. Most manufacturer's publish towing capacities based on a single occupant. Honda does not. Their towing capacity for the Ridgeline assumes two occupants and 200 lbs of gear. Here's a direct quote from their literature.
"Industry practice is to boast a high maximum tow rating, even though some sacrifice of passengers and cargo may be necessary to suitably accommodate such a trailer load - in some cases limiting the vehicle to one passenger to accommodate the maximum specified towing capacity. The Ridgeline's 5,000-pound rating is calculated to include up to two passengers and 200 pounds of cargo."
That's 350 lbs that must be subtracted from a competitor's ratings to make an even comparison with the Ridgeline. Obviously, trucks like the Taco, Frontier, and Dakota will still tow more than the Ridge. It's just that the difference isn't as great as their spec sheets would have you believe... until you read the fine print.
Side note: The Pilot is rated with four passengers plus gear. So Honda did have to make some concessions to the way the industry operates.
-----------------------
Are you caying that the Pilot can tow the max 3500 lbs, even if it's carrying 4 people and gear? :shades:
Uh ya....That certainly would be the place I would think to look for it. However it never crossed my mind to look under one of the rice burners for comparison information on the Colorado. But thanks for the insight :confuse:
That is what Honda is saying. Here's a direct quote.
"While conventional towing capacity figures boast a high maximum tow rating, even though some sacrifice of passengers and cargo may be necessary to suitably accommodate maximum loads, the Pilot's 3,500/4,500-pound rating is calculated to include up to four passengers and their cargo."
Here's the website. Scroll to the bottom for the section on towing.
http://hondanews.com/CatID2078?mid=2002051648598&mime=asc
this past weekend and she is thrilled with it.
I have not seen it yet, but this is the truck that I recommended she get.
She does not do any off road driving, nor does she do any towing. I'll see her in a few weeks and then I'll get to see it and compare it closely to my Frontier.
OkieScot
From the web site above:
To help ensure that customers will be able to move a maximum rated load up a grade from rest (such as pulling a loaded boat trailer up a launch ramp), engineers sought out some of the most challenging entry roads and launch ramps in the country. Testing verifies the Pilot's ability to handle a 17-degree (31-percent) grade on mountain roads approaching Lake Cumberland in southern Kentucky and a 15-degree (27-percent) grade at 5,280-foot elevation at Lake Tahoe.
A note in the Pilot's owner's manual suggests reducing gross combined weight 2-percent for every 1,000 feet of elevation. At sea level, the Pilot can tow a 4,500-pound boat and four passengers up an 18-degree (32-percent) slope.
With many vehicles they will give a maximum trailer weight but say that that weight should be reduced if cabin weight increases.
Example:
Gross combined weight for truck and trailer might be 10,000#.
Let's say the truck weight is 5000 and tow capacity 5000. Any weight added to the truck should reduce an equal amount of weight from the trailer to maintain that 10,000 # maximum weight. It isn't unusual to read that a crew cab of a certain model is rated to tow a lighter trailer than a standard model with the same drive train. The crew cab is heavier so the trailer needs to be lighter to maintain that Gross combined weight.
Honda is saying the Pilot will pull a 4500# boat while carrying 4 passengers!!
In the case of the Pilot the maximum weight of the trailer would probably remain the same even if the cabin load was only 1 person. It has to do with the Pilot being primarily a front wheel drive under a unitized body. It is not sitting on a heavy steel frame like the Ridgeline or other trucks. The hitch is attached to a sub structure that is not as strong as a heavy steel frame would be.
If this is not correct, someone will correct it! :shades:
Kip
Nissan's 4 wheel limited slip is only when 4WD is engaged, correct? That seems to be less practical on every day roads as compared to Fords full time system.
I still am leaning toward the trac. It has also been awarded 5 stars on frontal and side, like the Ridge. The other thing I wondered when driving the Nissan was how it would do on a long trip. I sensed it may get uncomfortable after awhile. The power seats on the trac were very comfortable."
Truxedo does not interfere with the util-track.
Nissan's 4-wheel limited slip is always engaged. However, in 2wd it will only be active on the rear, since that is all that is powered. Do a full-throttle turning start in the Nissan and the system will reduce power and apply brake as necessary to the inside rear to keep traction.
I agree that power seats offer the most comfort. The driver's seat in my Frontier has the same adjustments as a power seat (independently raise and lower the front and rear sections of the cushion, lumbar, etc.), but they are done manually, which in the long run might prove to be more reliable anyway. With 24,000 miles per year I've obviously done long days in the Frontier, and they have been comfortable.
The total max payload for Ridgeline is either 1549, 1558, or 1554 lbs depending on which model you look at. It varies because of things like accessories and such will add weight. The same is true of every other truck on the market.
The max bed payload (amount of weight to be hauled in the truck bed) is 1,100 lbs. Meaning that 454 lbs must be stored in the cab.
The same is true for every other truck. We just don't know what the exact numbers are. The manufacturers simply don't list the data on their websites. Instead, they have a vague disclaimer telling you that adjustments must be made.
Notice that I have not yet mentioned towing? That's because the 454 lbs in question has nothing to do with towing. It's a restriction on payload. Not the same thing.
The towing capacity of the Ridgeline is 5,000 lbs with 2 occupants and 200 lbs of gear in the vehicle. Others, which list higher towing capacities, do not include any weight except a driver.
I'm not sure that a 1:1 ratio is needed when calculating vehicle weight and towing wight combined. But if that is true, then a truck with a 6,000 lb capacity really has a capacity of only a 5,650 lbs once you add the passenger and cargo that is part of the Ridgeline's measure.
Hope that clears things up.
I would agree with the interpretation that that leaves only 4500 lbs for towing a trailer, BEFORE vehicle fluids and accessory weights have also been subtracted from the rating. In other words, it's actually lower than 4500 lbs.
Subtracting passenger and vehicle fluid weights from quoted maximum payload (or when figuring tow capacity) is standard. But the requirement to carry 500 lbs in the cab to offset a heavy cargo in the bed is not the case with any other truck that I know if.
Honda probably requires the 500 lbs in front to keep enough weight over the front axle when carrying (or towing) a heavy load in back.
Why not so with other trucks? BECAUSE THE RIDGELINE IS NOT A REAR-WHEEL DRIVE TRUCK. It's not a true AWD, either. From what I read, it is a FRONT-WHEEL DRIVE vehicle with pseudo-AWD. At no point are both axles driving simultanously.
Putting a heavy load in the rear of a front-wheel drive vehicle is bad news. Especially a front-wheel drive vehicle with a soft suspension such as the Ridgeline. The front becomes partly unweighted. There goes your traction. There goes your steering.
My interpretation for the 500 lb requirement is that (a) it helps keep maintain traction with the front wheels, and (b) it keeps the vehicle from breaking the rear springs, which by the way are coils, not leafs.
I'm sure the Ridgeline fits many people's preferences and lifestyles. But it's really a giant passenger car, not a truck.
Yeah right! Good one!
So a RL owner leaves his house to go get a maximum load for the bed. On the way he picks up a couple of friends to have 500# in the truck. Where in the truck do they have to be?
Should they all be in the front seat to keep more weight over the front axle?
So they get the 1500+ # in the bed. On the way home he drops the 2 friends off. How much of the load should he remove, to meet hauling requirements, before he continues on ?
That could sure get complicated.
I believe that Honda is simply stating that it will carry the 1500+ # and 500# of passengers and stuff. However, with or without the 500# up front the bed weight capacity probably remains the 1500+ #.
1500# is not all that much. Coil springs can easily handle it. Look at the load a Golf cart carries, when 4 golfers are aboard.
Kip
07 Sport Trac, V8 Limited
06 Honda Ridgeline, RTL
06 Nissan Frontier, NISMO
06 Tacoma, non-TRD (TRD not on the lot)
06 Dodge DakotaTRX4 Laramie
Here is my analysis and order of preference:
To start, the Trac and Ridgeline are in a different league from the rest. Now, if heavy off roading is a requirement, then that would put them below the Nissan and Toyota.
1. Sport Trac Depending on what an owner uses their vehicle for, the Ridgeline could easily be in the #1 spot.
BLUF: Greatly improved driving while retaining truck capabilities.
I put the Trac first for the following reasons:
a. Can tow 1400 lbs more
b. Has a low gear for better off roading
c. Fully boxed frame
d. I can order a sunroof on any trim level, with the Honda I have to get leather also or spend big bucks on after market.
e. More and better exterior color choices.
f. Exterior is the best in the group (the main reason my wife wouldn't let me buy a Ridge)
g. The tonneau cover/ bed extender is a great combination
Minuses:
- Not thrilled with the interior design/ the tan and grey interior. Wish charcoal was offered in the XLT.
2. Ridgeline
BLUF: A Honda Accord with a truck bed and towing capability
a. This vehicle is the most fun to drive. Quick and nimble while the Trac feels a little less nimble, a little more like driving a Cadillac.
b. Honda quality
c. The trunk is a fabulous feature, I can think of a 1,000 uses. The Trac's Tonneau/ bed extender is almost as good, except I can't have a "trunk" securing camping gear and bikes on top in the bed like I could with the Ridge.
Minuses:
- Not sure 5,000 lbs is enough
- Not sure it has enough off road capability
- Looks
- Sirius not offered at the dealership ( I prefer it over XM, which is all you can get at Honda)
- Have to get leather with Moon Roof
- Rims are uglier then the truck
3. Nissan:
a. The best of the solid axles to drive
b. Great Off-raod capability
c. Second best looking truck in the group
d. Rear seat bottom flips up or the back flips down
e. Cargo system in the back
Minuses:
-Full time 4WD not available, had quite a bit of tail spin while driving on dry roads
-I can't get the bed flexibility I can get with the Trac or Ridge. Tonnaue covers would intefer with utili trac in the bed. Also, covers are not easily removable like they are on the trac. Its either an open, unsecured bed or a closed bed.
-I have to go after market for a rear slider.
-No heating/cooling vents for rear passengers
4. Toyota
a. Nicest interior in the bunch
b. Best fuel economy, I believe even with mid-grade gas money is saved compared to the Nissan.
c. Great off-road capability (not sure wich is better, Nissan or Toyota)
Minuses:
- I did not like the driving experience at all. I felt like I was driving on a bubble, not connected to the road. It was alittle unnerving. Perhaps the TRD would change that.
-Because of the cab roof shape I can not get a moon roof.
-Full time 4WD not available
-I can't get the bed flexibility I can get with the Trac or Ridge. Tonnaue covers would intefer with utili trac in the bed. Also, covers are not easily removable like they are on the trac. Its either an open, unsecured bed or a closed bed.
-I have to go after market for a rear slider.
Dodge:
1. Ordering flexibility (amount of options available for different trims)
2. Full time 4WD available, did not test it
Minuses:
-Worse of the grouip
-Interior just a little more appealing then the Chevy Colorado
-Worse engine of the bumch
-I can't get the bed flexibility I can get with the Trac or Ridge. Tonnaue covers would intefer with utili trac in the bed. Also, covers are not easily removable like they are on the trac. Its either an open, unsecured bed or a closed bed.
-I have to go after market for a rear slider.
No. Honda simply states that the bed capacity is 1,100 lbs. The TOTAL max payload is 1550ish with 450ish in the cab.
Once again, this is no different than any other truck, except that the others don't publish that little factoid.
And I'm still waiting for someone to explain to me what Payload restrictions have to do with Towing capacity. Or do we have a few posters who need to have the difference explained to them?