Did you recently take on (or consider) a loan of 84 months or longer on a car purchase?
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
Options
Comments
Pros over the 08 (IMO)- shifter position, separate rear glass, illuminated steering wheel controls, aux in, improved crash structure, supposedly quieter
A wash - interior styling, same basic drivetrain but feels peppy enough in the 08
Cons - VCM adds complexity for little mpg benefit, increased width, styling, supposedly poorer interior plastics (from early reviews, but haven't seen in person)
All in all, its probably better, and there is a diesel in the pipeline. But if I were spending $30-35K today(which I didn't; thanks 08 Pilot!), I don't see what this offers over the Lambdas or possibly the Flex. And I think the VC matches up really well now. The CUV market sure has gotten competitive in the past 2-3 years. The 09 just seems like a lost opportunity.
25 NX 450h+ / 24 Sienna Plat AWD / 23 Civic Type-R / 21 Boxster GTS 4.0 / 03 Montero Ltd
One would think so....
On a side note, Honda further distanced themselves from their Acura counterpart by quite a bit. They look nothing alike, and the MDX is more driver oriented (SH-AWD), and less useful (awful 3rd row and cargo cap.) The 09 Pilot is way bigger and more useful, however, it has a completely different drive train, 4WD system included.
The Edmunds First Drive review keeps mentioning the word "utility" over and over, so this Pilot is obviously trying to lure those who would rather have efficiency over style and power. I suspect the ads will show all the cute little storage spaces...
I don't like it all that much, but a Honda is a Honda...
The problem is that the new Pilot is not more efficient or powerful then the competition.
I also did see that the Edmunds review used the word "utility" a lot as well. My question is, how much more "utility" does it really have over the competition?
I suspect the ads will show all the cute little storage spaces...
I think those little storage spaces are over rated, for every car. Usually, people fill those little places with junk that does not need to be in the car to begin with, and then they leave it there until they sell or trade their car. IMO they are worthless.
Let's see how long this lasts and if it affects supply of the Lambdas.
This is why imports do so well when they have a plant here. They pay their workers well, and don't have to deal with the UAW!
Could you imagine how much better the domestic brands would do if there was no UAW? They could actually build a great car and profit from it at the same time!
The '08 Touareg is definitely great looking, but we needed a 7 passenger vehicle. The GM triplets (Saturn/GMC/Buick) were under powered & too heavy, and the fit/finish wasn't there considering the price point they were asking for...and I'm not a fan of GM's history of the lack reliability.
Ultimately, the 3rd row seats were a joke in just about everything under $40k...and that's totally inexcusable at that price point. I'm 5' 11", and the only 7 seater that I could fit in with decent leg room was the CX-9 (granted, the GM triplets fit was ok, but the execution was inferior to the CX-9). The revised Subaru Tribeca & the new Highlander had great reliability, but again, 3rd row seating was poor.
Then the magazine reviews were published (Car & Driver, Motor Trend, Automobile, Road & Track, Autoweek), and selected CX-9 over the rivals. The power was uprated for '08 in the CX-9 from the previous year as well, using Ford's 3.7 V-6, up from the previous 3.5 liter unit. Unlike it's platform sister, the Ford Flex, the CX-9 utilizes a superior Aisin transmission, which had a proven track record in the VW Touareg (if you can recall, when the Touareg came out, it too won MT's Truck of the Year). Turning radius on the CX-9 is extremely good, especially for it's size.
Knowing that I was on a limited budget, the goal for me was to attain the best bang for the buck. The CX-9 proved to be better packaged than the Acura MDX (third seating is marginal at best) & out performed the V6 Buick Enclave (overweight & underpowered).
Not quite. While the Pilot has some nice interior dimensions, it falls a bit short in cargo space. And the third row still probably has nothing in comparison to larger CUVs (which makes sense, considering they are larger). The Lambdas which are 10-12 inches longer, don't have quite the interior volume of minivans- which are larger- come very close, in fact, having more than anything else beside the Suburban.
To tell the truth, I think GMC designed a better Pilot (or Pilot XL) in the Acadia. It's more spacious and comfortable than anything in the class. It's one of the most powerful and capable. And styling is muscular yet sleek- something the Pilot could improve on. For once I think honda could learn from GM.
The 3.7L was a great idea for Mazda. What is even better is that they build the engine completely, not Ford.
Overall space, yes. Passenger space, no. Also, comfort is subjective. Not everyone will agree on what is comfortable and what is not. I think the CX-9 is really comfortable, however, there have been a few to post here that it is not.
What CUV has more passenger space?
"Also, comfort is subjective"
True. But if third rows were in the question, the only thing comparable is the Taurus X.
Correction...memory seat
Honda has the Odyssey for those needing more space than the Pilot. Again, lambdas are a foot longer than the Pilot so they should have a lot more space inside. Yes, there's about 5CuFt of extra cargo space behind the 3rd row of the lambdas and maybe an inch of extra 3rd row legroom, but I'd expect a lot more than that for the foot of extra length.
The lambdas try to be a minivan and SUV in the same vehicle. I think the Pilot is a better SUV than the lambdas and the Odyssey a better minivan than the lambdas. A lot of it depends on the real-world use a person is really going to get out of a vehicle. I'd say that most folks are going for the SUV/CUV look over a minivan purely out of looks and vanity. If that's the case then just get what looks good to you but avoid any logic discussions
Tell it like it is, Bob. :shades:
So I'll give you a link to where people don't have opinion, they're just buying it.
http://editorial.autos.msn.com/listarticle.aspx?cp-documentid=434652
Honda Pilot #6 in this list.
and other link to:
So I don't know what full size CUV get award, but Acadia is defiantly number one in full size CUV's categories.
Plus, Lambdas win Motorweek's Drivers Choice Award: Best Crossover, 2nd year in a row.
http://www.mpt.org/motorweek/dc2008/
"The top 10 SUVs that shoppers on MSN Autos are researching most."
This lists what MSN Auto readers are researching, not buying.
As for the lambdas trying to be a combination of a minivan and an SUV, I'd say it's the best combo out there. It combines the two without giving up much of either. I think the Acadia is a better SUV than the Pilot. The only thing SUV-like I think the Pilot has over the GMC is the square, tough wannabe, slightly dated exterior, and the worse gas mileage. The Acadia is more powerful, and has more utility. As for the Odyssey being a better minivan than the lambdas, of course. Just about any minivan (save the micro Mazda 5 and the now departed Chevy Uplander) is a better minivan than the Lambdas. However, if you need minivan capability but want the perks of SUVs and CUVs, the lambdas are the best combination out there. And that's what consumers seem to want right now. They don't necessarily need the rough-tough looks. However, not everyone needs the space of a minivan, so they go with some of the smaller choices on the market.
It seems like Honda may have de-powered their 3.5L V6 for the Pilot to keep it in line with the other crossovers regarding fuel mileage because they are still using a 5-speed ATX while others have moved on to a 6-speed ATX.
My wife and I saw the new Pilot in the flesh at our auto show this past week and while we agreed it is somewhat handome from the A-pillar back, the front is far from lovable. The other thing we noticed was that it did have a lot of useful cubbies all over the interior (it was on a floor level rotating stand with the doors open so you could get a good look inside) but we also agreed that we would never use all of them in a million years and we have 2 small kids. We'll stick with something more handsome to us that offers similar if not somewhat less storage space located around the cabin. That being said, she decided that she wants a CX-9 or an Edge. The latter ended up being her favorite which shocked me, but the CX-9 doesn't cost all that much more comparably equipped and offers a whole lot more utility.
I'm still intrigued by the Journey and got to look one over thoroughly on the floor of the show. The storage bins in the floor behind the front seats and the storage bin under the passenger seat cushion are really, really cool IMO. However, the interior of the one they had on the floor, an SXT I believe, was absolutely dreaful. The rear camera screen was at the bottom of the center stack which is totally absurd and the materials were, IMO, not only hard on the eyes, but also not nice to touch. Then there was the rear DVD player. I popped the screen down and it completely blocked the view out of the rear from the rear view mirror. Nice first effort Dodge, but better luck with gen 2.
After being able to see the 3 Lamdas close together we both agreed that the Acadia was the best of the bunch. However neither of us like the interior all that much. The center stack was flat and dull to us when compared to others, and the vehicle itself is just too big. I know I'm going to get flamed for this, but I found that the second row sliding mechanism in the Acadia to be the worst of the bunch. I could easily figure out the system in the competitors but the Acadia's second row seats wouldn't slide forward more than a few inches for me. Maybe it was because they were captains chairs and you could get to the back by going between them? I certainly couldn't get to row 3 with the space I was afforded when the forward slide stopped.
We also saw the Flex (it too was on a low rotating stand with the doors open). My wife hates the look of it too so we didn't stay there too long. I was actually a bit surprised by it. I thought it would be bigger because the pictures of it make it appear that way to me. But is was actually pretty low to the ground and had an interesting presence to it. It's hard to describe, but it definitely was different. The interior looked really nice to me. It had a similar look to that of the new Volvo S80 and I like that interior a lot.
However, not everyone needs the space of a minivan, so they go with some of the smaller choices on the market
How are the lambdas a "smaller choice on market" when they're the same size externally as a minivan?
I'm not saying the lambdas aren't good vehicles, they're great replacements for GM minivans and big SUVs. To me though, one of the big advantages of the Pilot (and Highlander) is the smaller footprint making it easier to drive, manauver, etc...just less bulk. The Pilot isn't competing against the lambdas, but rather against the Explorers, Yukons, etc because it's an SUV.
A closer competitor for the lambda in Honda's lineup would be the Odyssey based on the exterior size, but it's hard to compare exactly because GM doesn't have a minivan and Honda doesn't have an CUV. But if someone put interior space and MPG high on their list of priorites, then the Odyssey would win out over the lambda.
You're right, the lamdas are GMs SUV/Minivan compromise. They have some of the advantages of both SUVs and minvans, without being the best in either category, but that's the nature of compromise.
Can't argue with that "logic"
Well, I wouldn't go that far - but the Pilot doesn't have a CVT, which is the only way Ford managed to haul a 4200 lb car with a 3.0 liter engine. The Freestyle has "adequate" power, less power than most people expect these days.
It is all moot anyway, since the Taurus X has the 3.5L and a 6 speed transmission...
2009 Pilot: 191, 79
2008 Pilot: 188, 78
Saturn Outlook: 201, 78
Odyssey: 201, 77
Sienna: 201, 77
Taurus X: 200, 75
Tahoe: 202, 79
Suburban: 222, 79
Highlander: 188, 75
For some people like myself, the difference in 13" between Pilot/Highlander and Outlook/Minivans is pretty important: I have not so much space in my garage - Pilot fits well, others a very tight squeeze. I have to turn into it from a narrow alley. I live in the city, so I parallel park it in city spots a good bit. It helps to not have that extra foot, and judging the rear is easier too.
Come on, you've gotta read better. I said if they don't need space like a minivan (which the Acadia has) then they go for something smaller, like the Highlander. And the lambdas are a bit smaller than all minivans but the Toyota Sienna. Another good thig about the lambdas is they don't really drive that big. They feel bigger than a Highlander, but the old Pilot, not so much.
Honda doesn't have an SUV? Where have you been in this discussion? The Pilot is an SUV, and while Honda did want to give it more of the utility of real SUVs (good marketing point) they clearly understand that the Highlander is one of its main competitors. And it's a unibody. There's nothing SUV about that.
Bottom line, what I was saying was GMC designed a crossover that is bot rugged and sleek, one that combines the utility and ability of an SUV, with the comfort of a car, and a look thats rugged yet refined. I'd say that's what Honda wanted. I just think GM did a little better job of it.
As for the CX-9 and the Edge, good luck with your choice. While I'm not a fan of either, I'd go for the CX-9 as the Edge is a bit dissapointing to me. A Honda CR-V has more interior room, while being over half a foot shorter.
Yes, I too thought the Journey was a bit of a dissapointment in Chicago. Dodge didn't get it enough. I'd much rather have a Highlander (I'm quickly becoming a fan).
With the Acadia's tilt and slide seat, I'm suprised you couldn't get it to work. At first, no body really knows how to work it, but after a second or two, it becomes so easy. I've neverbeen able to climb to the third row so easy, except in those old minivans that have the second row bench.
The Flex was interesting to me, too. The Interior will be its major selling point- I thought it was simple, but nicely laid out. As to whether it's an imporvement over the TX, I'm not sure. For now I'll just say I wouldn't be ready to pay the extra grand or two (especially with these huge rebates on the TX).
That makes sense...wasn't the Acadia introduced in Feb of 2007? There would have been less Acadias on the road in March 2007 as compared to 2008 since the car was brand new.
Not sure what point you're trying to make...
39% is based on selling days (28 last year, 26 this year).
To show the consumer shift from SUV to CUV, GMC's SUV sales (Envoy & Yukon) were down over 3800 units for the same months.
It costs less too. But neither of us like the way it looks on the inside or out and I can't stand 4 cylinders in an SUV.
The Flex was interesting to me, too.
Yeah, I can't put it into words, but it was kind of a pleasent surprise to me. I liked it in the pictures but it was much better looking in the flesh. It has kind of a 'Three Little Bears' thing going on. Not too big and not too small. Not to tall and not too short. Not too... Well, you guys get the point.
Make no mistake though, it is not trying to replace the minivan like the Lambdas or the CX-9 though. It definitely is a direct replacement for the TX. Just more upscale.
I would imagine that production wasn't going at full tilt right off the bat for the Acadia, etc, right?
I'm not sure why this is being discussed, though. Because the McDonald's hamburger sells the most, is it the best? How about the F-150 - is it the best, most competitive pickup truck? These things sell the most, but that proves nothing.
I said that Honda doesn't have a CUV, not SUV.
Fact is that Honda has both the Pilot and the Odyssey, so it doesn't need to have a bulked up CUV trying to function as a minivan like GM.
This is purely subjective, but do you really think so?
I felt that they did drive big. Beefy, substantial in a good way, but big for sure.
Visibility may have made it seem worse to me, and as an owner I'm sure you'd become better at judging where the corners are with time.
I feel a bit silly for not checking over my message before posting. But the Pilot is a CUV. Period. It's unibody. Styling doesn't change what something really is. It's a CUV and no one is fooled. Honda wasn't trying to pull a fast one. They just wanted styling that reflects that the Pilot has more capability than, say, a CX-9.
And yes. It is a fact that Honda has both the Odysey and the Pilot. So the Pilot doesn't have to copy the lambdas and act like an SUV and a minivan. The Lambdas do it well, though.
That makes no sense. Obviously there is something that one has over the other that draws buyers to the product- sometimes little more than image (like a burger from Mickey D's). And sometimes the product is better. I'm not a big Camry fan, but I will admit that it's a better product than the last gen. Malibu. I don't think the line is always that clear, but that's an example.
I won't say all that, but I though it wasn't ugly. It looked okay. Maybe it was becasue I saw that Fairlane concept in Chicago 3-4 years ago, so I knew what to expect. For right now, it's nowhere near my list, but then again, I'm not really in the market right now. In fact, two months ago, I replaced my 90's M3 with an '02 Mustang Cobra- and that's my play-car. So as you can see, I'm not too focused on that.
Your point is valid but Honda markets it as an SUV. Period. :P
ahhh the world of absolute's is back...oppinion veiled as fact...
so to keep with your loosely termed logic, what do you consider the cherokee, grand cherokee???
from Edmund's....
"Unlike most other traditional SUVs from domestic automakers, the Jeep Grand Cherokee has always been built using a carlike unibody chassis rather than a body-on-frame design."
your opinions are strictly your's in some if not most cases... PERIOD... as one can indeed make an argument the Pilot is an SUV.
edmund's yet again;
"the Pilot tucks eight-passenger seating into an easy-to-maneuver midsize SUV body."
If I were you I'd let the Pilot stay in the SUV end of the pool as if you don't you can't say the Lambda's are the only 8 passenger option's out there in CUV land...
LOL
Click here for the photo page. The brief reviews of all of them are on the other 8 pages.
I have to say, that dash in the Highlander looks like a train wreck to me.
Yet again, I logically defend my point.
And I never said the Lambdas are the only 8 pass CUV in the kiddie pool, I simply said the best (heh, jk).
Now that's not saying that you can't compare the SUV Pilot against the CUV lambda, just like you can compare the minivan Odyssey against the CUV lamda, but just because you compare them doesn't change what they are.