Toyota Tacoma vs Honda Ridgeline

jimsa1252 · March 2005

The Ridgeline looks like just another ugly and quirky Honda product i.e. Element. I can't wait to see them show up in the salvage yard with bent frames due to load and performance issues. The bent frames will cause the entire truck to bend due to its Accord style unibody construction, not much different that the Oddessy or Accord platform which is not made for truck duty. Acutually here in Southern California, every used Honda these days seens to be a salvage title or prior theft recovery. So much for Honda Durability.

Wait a few years, we'll see all the kids slam their Ridgelines to the ground, put big loud exaust pipes on them and decorate with Asian letter stickers.

gearhead1 · March 2005

"The bent frames will cause the entire truck to bend due to its Accord style unibody construction, not much different that the Oddessy or Accord platform which is not made for truck duty."

Have you read anything about the construction of this truck???? Apparently not, Please do your research before you post.

mikefm58 · March 2005

" The Ridgeline is an interesting vehicle, but I am still not sure what Honda's target audience is. I think you will see more SUV owners make the switch than truck owners "

That's what I've been reading in some of the Ridgeline reviews. It's more targeted to SUV owners who have an occasional need to put extra stuff in the back. Not for serious towing or off roading truck needs.

One thing I don't like about the Ridgeline, and also the Pilot, is there's no 2WD model. I'm in Florida and have no use for AWD. I bought a Highlander over the Pilot last year simply because with the options I wanted, I saved $5K.

I've been considering a Tundra or the Ridgeline and even the Tundra 2WD double cab V8 is less than the Ridgeline. I haven't priced both out in detail yet though. I'm waiting until Edmunds gets the pricing details of the new X-SP sport package.

whaleya · March 2005

Not all Hondas are banned from Mt. Washington Rd. The transmission must show an "L" or a "1" - thus some Hondas are banned.

This is a function of the need for strong engine braking on the way DOWN, not the strength of the transmission on the way UP.

Also, all Hummers are banned from the road as well (too large)

http://www.mt-washington.com/autoroad/autovehiclelimits.html

varmint · March 2005

Jimsa1252 - You've got a lot of reading to do. If you have questions, go ahead and post them here or the main Ridgeline thread. We'll help get you a clue. There's no shame in being uninformed on such a new vehicle.

Midnightsun - Took my CR-V along with several others up Mt. Washington last summer.

eric091572 · March 2005

I've got a question that maybe one of you out there might know: if the "infinitely variable" nature of the VTM-4 system may compensate for the lack of a specific geared 4-LO?

Anyone have any thoughts on this issue? Thank you!

midnightsun · March 2005

I stand corrected on the transmission exemption. Thinking back to the auto transmissions I've driven, I can't remember any that did not have L or D1. It blows me away that such a configuration would even be sold (safety issue) in a country that has mountains. I assume that *current* Honda models all have L or D1 but maybe that's another bad assumption.

Whether the owners know to *use* the lower gears is another question.

varmint · March 2005

Nope. VTM-4 allows for variable amounts of power (up to 70%) to the rear wheels. However, it does nothing in terms of changing the engine speeds vs wheel speed.

By increasing the number of engine revs to the number of tire revolutions, low gearing allows the engine to reach higher rpms while attempting to accomplish the same job. These are random numbers but... that means you can apply as much torque at 5 mph as the engine normally would at 10 mph.

Equally important though, is the advantage lower gears gives the driver in terms of control. Throttle response is easier to manage while in low gear. You can avoid "jerking" a load or lurching over a rock while driving off-road.

varmint · March 2005

The Mt. Washington Auto Road isn't a public road. While we do have mountains in this country, none of our public roads take the same lengthy, 12 percent grade that engineers chose for Mt. Washington. With the possible exception of some logging roads, it is nearly unique.

atlgaxt · March 2005

Slightly off topic, but on my Mazda B4000 (Ranger Clone, same chassis with the old Exploder) with the ford 5 speed auto, you can select first gear, but there is no engine braking in first gear if the vehicle is coasting. For engine braking you need to select second gear, which would not be all that helpful on a steep road. Is this common? If so, Mt. Washington might want to update their restricted list.

driver6 · March 2005

to Midnight Sun:
The Ridgline has a D1, as well as a D2 as well as a way to down drive from Drive to D3.

explorerx4 · March 2005

...or you might want to get the transmission checked.

midnightsun · March 2005

If you're talking paved roads, that is correct.

If you're talking dirt, not correct. There are lots of steep, long unpaved roads in the U.S. (at least in the western U.S.), and I'm not even talking 4x4 trails. Sure, the Accord or Civic is not likely to be taken on those kinds of roads, but the Ridgeline is being projected as some kind of supertruck. That's why people get into trouble: they believe the marketing hype.

There's also the possibility that the manufacturers just plain f*ck up in spec'ing the vehicle. Every summer, for years, I'd pass by lines of Chrysler minivans (the early ones), hoods up and antifreeze spewing all over the place, near the buffalo viewing area on I-70 near Genesee (CO). The cooling system in those vehicles was just not up to the ascent. There are bound to be the oddball poorly-maintained or just bad-luck vehicles on that climb, but when I see ONE make/model consistently having the SAME breakdown, I am suspicious.

I bet the market segment Ridgeline is targeting is those minivan buyers, who then "moved up" to SUVs, and now think a truck would be cool. Honda ads on TV gush about being rated "most family-friendly". Fine. I just hope those families don't think they are better *trucks* than the other products out there, based on some misleading statements posted by Honda salesmen.

supcrds · March 2005

>>>>>>>

coming in a little late on this but something to keep in mind is the wording in the orignal post was "5200# boat" I know my boat is listed with its weight and not boat/trailer, good chance this was a 5200 lb boat on a 1200 lb trailer, which would put this WAY over the limit.
Also I agree I would not get a truck that will just tow the intended load. If I am towing 3500# I will shop for a 5000# rating.

dadoftay · March 2005

How's the MPG side of the equation?? With gas running $2.00/gallon in Atlanta, I'm sure people are gonna pass up the bigger offerings for some of that Honda reliablility. If the Pilot gets around 20mpg, I'm sure the Ridgeline can't be too far off.

gearhead1 · March 2005

Just filled up. It was 17.6 mpg, but it's new (450 miles so far), this should improve. Avoid gas with MMT in it. Honda says this will decrease fuel economy and damage emissions system if used regularly.

dadoftay · March 2005

Sorry, you gotta help me on MMT. What is it and what does it do and why doesn't Honda like it--and why does it taste funny??

But pretty sweet already pulling almost 18mpg!!

gearhead1 · March 2005

It's a Manganese fuel additive and Honda doesn't like it. The sign at the Philips 66 station says their gas is Honda approved.

d3coy · March 2005

btw it dosent really matter WHERE you buy your gas unless you live in alaska or houston where it is pumped from, all fuel maufacturers pump their gas into the same pipelines and pull out of the same pipelines, thus all the "brands" of gas (one of the most highly regulated liquids on the open market anyway) get mixed, this is what is know in the industry as fungible gas, or generic. additionally the additves placed in fuel are so minimal that they are added somewhere in the range of 1 fl oz. per 1,000 Gal. so dont worry about where you get your gas, jsut how much you need to put in it.

gearhead1 · March 2005

Yeah, I've heard all gas is the same, but find it hard to believe, as I've had experiences where some of my vehicles definitly got bad gasoline from different stations. Then there's gas with methanol, ethanol etc. Chevron with techroline?? Not all gas is the same, despite the fact I keep hearing it is. It's just not my experience with gas stations.

wooddorker · March 2005

"Leather interior, navigation, moonroof are available. These features are absent on the tacoma. What's up Toyota!? Are we in the new Millenium are not? Get with the program.

Ridgeline has a independent 4 wheel suspension delivering a true Sedan ride on a truck! "

WHY are you buying a TRUCK????

Do you know why independent suspension does over rough terrain or when heavily loaded?

If you want a Luxury CAR, buy one. If you want a TRUCK, don't knock them because it's a truck. I have a truck, an Outback, and a Jeep Wrangler. All have features that would ruin the others if shared. The Wrangler would SUCK with a loaded interior and independent suspension, the Outback would SUCK with solid axles, a box frame, and a straight six.

Perhaps an loaded indie suspended SUV would be perfect for you?

gearhead1 · March 2005

"Do you know why independent suspension does over rough terrain or when heavily loaded?"

Why yes I do know how a independent suspension performs over a rough terrain, because I just bought a Ridgeline, and it performs superbly off road unlike the full size Chevy 4x4 I'm used to that practically give occupants whiplash over the same trail. The Ridgeline rides like a soft cloud by comparison. If you want a refined truck that is every bit as rugged, but with great ride get a Ridgeline, or stay with the same old stuff. I'm moving into the future of truck design with Honda.

wooddorker · March 2005

"Why yes I do know how a independent suspension performs over a rough terrain, because I just bought a Ridgeline, and it performs superbly off road unlike the full size Chevy 4x4 I'm used to that practically give occupants whiplash over the same trail."

Your definition of "off road" is probably quite different than mine.

varmint · March 2005

"Your definition of "off road" is probably quite different than mine."

Actually, you said "rough terrain", which I would not use to describe something like Rattler down at Paragon.

Fact is very few puck-up trucks will do well in technical off-road situations. They require modification. And while making those modifications will grant the vehicle greater capability on the trails, it will also impact how the vehicle performs on the road and under load. Take a look at what happens to the Frontier's max payload when you add the Nismo package.

So far, the Ridgeline has proven that it can handle loads. They've tested it on the track with other vehicles loaded the same way for comparison. The Ridgeline handled the loads just fine and bettered them all when it came to moving the load around corners. Off-road it handles hills, ruts, rocks, water, and mud just as well as the next truck. Anybody looking to tackle boulders is going to make those modifications I mentioned above.

If we were talking about trucks with Super HD packages, I would agree without on Honda's choice of suspension. But it appears that the IRS set-up under the Ridgeline is equal to the kind of tasks mid-size trucks are expected to perform. In fact, with a payload of 1,550 lbs, it is rated higher than any other mid-size pickup.

caltaco · March 2005

I was realy looking forward to Honda's entry into the Truck market. I find Toyota's turning into a bit of a GM like product now. The styling is close to the Colorado, fake hood scoop etc.

I just can't get past the shear uglyness of the Ridgeline. I'm sure the engine and drive train is excellent...but that face!

I went with the 05 Tacoma Sport......I just couldn't do it......

varmint · March 2005

Yeah, I'm not a fan of the styling, either. It's too odd for the no nonsense truck buyers who make up the majority of the market.

If I had never seen the Ridgeline prototypes, I'd have guessed that a Honda truck would have a conservative exterior with an upscale, car-like interior. Instead we got an odd exterior with a completely boring interior.

gearhead1 · March 2005

I too was an early critic of the styling, and was getting a 05 Taco. I now am driving a Ridgeline(I now love the styling). I had my deal set up for 2,500 below MSRP on a Taco Sport, and wound up paying MSRP on a Ridgeline. There just wasn't even a comparison. The Ridgeline was a much more refined truck. and the leather interior is anything but boring. The Ridgeline is as much of an improvement over the 05 Taco as the 05 Taco is over the 04 Taco.

Much better improvements IMO that the 05 Taco doesn't have:

-The Ride quality (can't beat that 4 wheel independant suspension)

- This is one quiet ride (stone quiet compared to the Taco I drove).

- Side air bags (I like Honda's safety for all program. Safety should not be a hard to find option. Way to go Honda)

-No partime 4X4. I love the AWD off road and VSC and VTM-4 lock, which locks the rear diff.

- Leather interior, moon roof, XM Radio, navigation. The interior cab is also roomier. Over all, far classier interior. The center console is also a much better design. Dual climate control ( can't remember if the Taco has this, sorry.)

-Flip up back seats offer far more storage in cab than the 05 Taco.

-Bed design. Do I need to even say it? The inbed Trunk beats any truck hands down, and may be the sole reason many people buy this truck. The tailgate is rated at 300 lb capacity vs the 200 lb rating of the Taco. 2 way opening tail gate.

Hope this gives some people some food for thought.

caltaco · March 2005

I agree the Ridgeline has got some great features and it drove great but not enough for me to over look the styling.

My 05 Sport drives very quiet compared to my previous Taco 01 and was comparable to the Ridgeline I drove. I've heard the comments about the noise level from a few people. Maybe a lesser model?

I do hope the Ridgeline gives Toyota a wake up call.

treyh1 · March 2005

I'm not sold on the Tacoma yet either, but I can't see buying a pickup that I can't just put something in the bed over the side before I get it. I can live with the looks, but if you use the bed a lot that really, really reduces the functionality. It has a lot of positives over the competition, but with the negatives it's far from a slam dunk. At real-life prices you're talking a $3k-$4k difference depending on your needs; I'm not sure it's an apples-apples comparison in the first place.

ridgeowner3 · March 2005

Go to Edmunds and select all the Toyota Options that come with the Ridge RTS. The TMVP will be MORE than Ridge RTS MSRP, which is what I paid on 3/2. You still won't have the trunk, 4W disc brakes, unibody, 4W independent suspension, rear leg room, composite bed, in-bed secure spare tire, quiet ride, horse power, subwoofer stereo package...and the Ridge is so fun to drive. I drove both, and the Honda is quicker and whips around those turns. I swear it drives better than my wifes Camry!

If you want a tow truck, buy a tow truck.
If you want a garbage truck, buy a garbage truck.
If you want a serious off-road truck, fix one up yourself.
But if you want a comfortable vehicle to enjoy life in, buy a Ridgeline. It's worth every penny!

treyh1 · March 2005

Which is why I said "depending on your needs". 4W disk brakes? Couldn't care less. 4WD? Don't need it. Unibody on a truck? That's far from a hard positive.

I want a truck for occasional hauling that's also a daily driver. Limited slip or locker is fine. I'm going to look at a Ridgeline, but for what I need it's going to be a few thousand more than a Toyota or Nissan (will look at those also), and the side bed height really bugs me. The ride & refinement may be enough to overcome that, but Honda hardly put out a slam dunk. I have an Odyssey that I'm very happy with, but it's far from perfect too.

varmint · April 2005

"Unibody on a truck? That's far from a hard positive."

If we explained that the combination of a ladder frame and unibody was more than twice as stiff as the next best truck would that make it understandable?

xwesx · April 2005

Please do explain it. Why is "stiffer" better? I would think that if you were in a condition that would flex a truck (such that the bed was twisted, say, 20% offset from cab), it is good for the flex to happen because having a unibody that stiffened the truck would put an aweful lot of pressure on it at the points where it was connected to the frame. This would tend to cause failure at those points whereas flex would help to alleviate the pressure.... wouldn't it? I am not an offroader, so I've never really thought too much about it, but I have about twisted my Chevy in half before trying to navigate my yard with 2 yards of sand in the bed. It hasn't seemed to damage the truck at all (other than snapping the exhaust pipe once) and if it weren't for the flex, I would have had tires dangling mid-air and likely been SOL. Granted, I have seen trucks going down the highway at a tilt due to bent frames, but I always assumed it was a result of a past collision rather than frame flexing.

Anyway, a good explanation really would be appreciated.

-Wes-

treyh1 · April 2005

I just have a degree in mech engineering & 15 years experience with design. If you dumb it down, I think maybe I can grasp it.

There's a reason most pickup trucks are body-on-frame, Einstein. Just because the Ridgeline's design is best for you & your application doesn't mean it's best for every truck out there.

xwesx · April 2005

There's a reason most pickup trucks are body-on-frame

Would you care to elaborate, treyh1?

Thanks.

gearhead1 · April 2005

I'm sure with his 15 years of engineering he will be able to tell us how the best auto engineers in the industry screwed up the Ridgeline. LOL , I love these guys.

varmint · April 2005

Let us not forget the folks responsible for the Aztek were engineers.

Getting back on track...

Apparently you guys don't know much about trucks if you're questionning frame stiffness as a positive attribute. So I'll try to keep it less than technical. Every other piece of hardware on a truck is attached to the frame/chassis. Stuff like the suspension, the bed, the engine, etc. If the frame is al dente, those parts will have a hard time doing their job.

Try playing basketball on a hardwood court. Now imagine playing on loose rocks. You can't jump as well when the ground shifts beneath you. You can't run as fast. You can't stop and change direction as easily.

The same applies for trucks. A vehicle's suspension is tuned with a specific geometry in mind. As the truck body flexes, that geometry is changed, and the suspension can't do its job. That limits the loads it can carry. It limits the amount of weight the truck can control. That has nothing to do with how I might use a truck. It's simply the basics of engineering.

Wanna know why the mid-size Ridgeline's 1,500 lbs payload is higher than even the full-size F-150? Stiffer chassis.

As for the theory of bending is better, that is simply not true. You'll never find a hardcore off-roader boasting about how his ride flexes. Call one of their trucks "flexible", and they'll reach for a baseball bat. :sick:

gearhead1 · April 2005

"Let us not forget the folks responsible for the Aztek were engineers."

I said the best engineers.

They would be the ones working at Honda.

once_for_all · April 2005

you want a vehicle to flex where it is supposed to, and not flex where it isn't.

Suspension provides the flex. Chassis flex messes up the suspension characteristics thereby limiting all kinds of good things (handling, load carrying, off roading, going around a curve, etc.)

Look, the reason the independent rear suspension is so good, is exactly because it flexs. The reason the Taco solid axle is bad, is because the wheels don't flex independent of each other.

None of this is rocket science, just common sense.

John

xwesx · April 2005

you want a vehicle to flex where it is supposed to, and not flex where it isn't.

Fair enough, but I am not convinced that a frame like that on my old '69 is not supposed to flex. After all, the cab and the box are not one piece, but two entirely separate ones that have a 1/2" of gap between them. I'd say that it is designed like this to allow flex.

I am certainly not arguing against the advantages of IRS for its intended purpose here. I am just discussing stiffness.

But, I think John answered the question: "Chassis flex messes up the suspension characteristics thereby limiting all kinds of good things (handling, load carrying, off roading, going around a curve, etc.)" The clarifying point is that you do not want a vehicle to flex where it is not designed to flex, and if you put a unibody on a ladder frame, you are trying to mitigate the chassis flex.

canadiantaco · April 2005

if u want a truk thats uglier then a mini van pick the ridgeline
if u want a truk thats nice looking pick the tacoma
if u want a truk thats a truck and not a minivan missing the back seat and a trunk pick the ridgeline
if u want a truk thats a truk and not an overpriced minivan pik the taco
if u want a slow truck that drives like a minivan pik the ridgeline
if u want a quik truk that drives like a celica that mated with a tundra pik the tacoma
very ez choice
if u want a truk pik the taco
if u want a deformed minivan pik the ridgeline and u can become the next coolest thing to a soccer mom ..... a soccer dad...
im not biased... its the truth

gd113 · April 2005

Negative comments like this remind me of when the RAV4 came out. Small SUV, indy suspension, unibody, all wheel drive. "Thats not an SUV", then every other car company incorporated its features into their own SUVs. Toyotas are great. I was all set to get an 05 Tacoma even though there appear to be numerous quality issues if you read the Taco boards. Paint chipping, leaking windshields, rattles, etc. I think you don't like the Ridge then don't, but its silly to be giving everyone your definition of what a truck is supposed to be. My hand truck I use for pushing stuff agrees with me.

55535432 · April 2005

if u want a quik truk that drives like a celica that mated with a tundra pik the tacoma
--------------------------------------------------------
?????????? :confuse:

Tacos are good, but drives like a Celica, please, thats a lie. Ive got a highschool buddy with a Tacoma x-runner.How he got one maybe he is a Toyota stockholder. I've driven the x-runner and it is the only Taco that is sportscarlike in handling, to get one you are either very lucky or a liar.If you have the x-runner, then I would agree with you that it's a quick truck. However the x-runner is only 5-10% of all the Tacomas produce, haven't seen one in MD, PA, DE, and VA.

If you have the everyday ordinary Tacoma, the Ridge is way lot better in every department except for towing and the looks.And if being a soccer dad means people/ girls rolling down there windows and taking a second look at you, then won't mind being a soccer dad at all. When a co-worker and me were in a Ridge we got more looks in this truck over my RX8, with matching thumbs up. Amazing but true, Friends who owned Tacos havent complained of the the same thing. Guess the Taco is the more handsome truck but the Ridge got charisma. Gals dig charisma better. THATS THE TRUTH .End of disccusion.

P.S.

I drive a leased 05 Frontier, an 04 Mazda RX8 (thats why I understand sporty handling) and a Pilot 03.

gearhead1 · April 2005

What do you expect from a guy that uses the word "ain't". Obviously, he doesn't know what he's talking about and is to lazy or doesn't know how to do his home work before he opens his mouth. His post is dripping with bile and ignorance. I had my choice, and the Taco doesn't compare. I researched both of these vehicles to death and Honda got my business. It's to bad Toyota went to market with a vehicle that is wrought with so many problems it is more reminiscent of a Ford than a Toyota. If you want to see true red neck, inbred hill billy ignorance, talk to a full size Dodge, Ford, Chevy owner about the Taco or Ridgeline. Woooo Weeee that's fun.

boomer1b · April 2005

Research AIN'T nothing. Real world experience and usage IS !

If the research was done..I would be very afraid of hondas auto transmission woes with the V-6.

Yota ain't a bad truck either.................

ME.....I am just a certified redneck that owns a big Chevy truck.
But it fits MY needs for heavy towing, hauling, and snowplowing !

And NO I don't have a gunrack......I keep my gun under the seat in a LOCKED compartment....................

Carry ON guys............Remember...BUY what YOU like ! :P

nbtacoma · April 2005

I've driven Tacomas for 8 years and have had my 05 for a week now and I love it. Same thing, I did alot of research and tried to make my decision without bias but when you have a vehicle serve you as well as my last Tacoma, it's hard not to. I guess I needed a vehicle that lives up to my lifestyle...if I wanted it to look pretty I would have bought a sports car.

xwesx · April 2005

Hahahhahaha! That's the best, most good-natured, post I have read in quite a while. Thanks......

ridgeowner3 · April 2005

If you can't afford it, don't buy it.
If you can't comprehend it, don't comment on it.
If you can't handle it, don't cry about it.
And, obviously, you can't handle the truth!
Jealousy and envy are the best compliments...Thanks!
--------------
Minivan? I don't know where you see the similarities. I'd say it's more like a mini-Avalanche, which Edmunds describes as "Combining the comforts of a Suburban with the practicality of a Silverado, the Avalanche is a crossover vehicle that creatively provides the best of both worlds." However, the Honda is even better for many reasons.

So, for all of you who are seriously considering the Ridgeline, sort through the Taco-owner posts, then read the Ridge-owner posts, and put yourself into the group that best suits you based on your needs (and intellect). For all of you who are just here to bash the vehicle you either can't afford or can't comprehend, or just because you can't handle the fact that you bought an inferior vehicle, you can crawl back in your shell, er Taco, and fantasize about soccer moms and soccer dads.

nbtacoma · April 2005

Wow, I thought this was a discussion about vehicles...you really have issues. Seems the Honda Ridgeline is the vehicle to buy if you're compensating for something...

ridgeowner3 · April 2005

LOL! Thanks for proving my point about Taco owners on this board!

What about my posts isn't about vehicles?

Forget about it. You're in the wrong place. Bye now.
(Educating some people is like trying to teach a fish to write. It ain't gonna happen!)

Toyota Tacoma vs Honda Ridgeline

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles