-September 2024 Special Lease Deals-
2024 Chevy Blazer EV lease from Bayway Auto Group Click here
2024 Jeep Grand Cherokee lease from Mark Dodge Click here
2025 Ram 1500 Factory Order Discounts from Mark Dodge Click here
2024 Chevy Blazer EV lease from Bayway Auto Group Click here
2024 Jeep Grand Cherokee lease from Mark Dodge Click here
2025 Ram 1500 Factory Order Discounts from Mark Dodge Click here
Comments
Interesting you should comment on the styling. Marketing people have done research on the styling of cars with controversial styling that provoke strong negative and positve reactions ( I think it's a beautiful design by the way) sell better than just a bland design that elicits no reaction. They conclude that this will work in Hondas favor. The PT Cruiser and thde Element both have cult followings. The Aztek not so much. Bland is not better most definitly, and for all the bitching I hear about the styling, people sure do seek me out at every fill up and parking lot telling me how much they like it.
I have the same strange reaction gearhead1. :P
PS: I think the Toyota is a good looking truck and the Ridgeline is kind of ugly, but my wife likes it.
So did I, that's why I bought a Ridgeline instead of my Taco Sport.
Breakover angle is the clearance angle between the axles. The lower the number, the more likely you are to get high-centered on a rock or other such object.
kcram - Pickups Host
Bob
Because Toyotas are generally acknowledged by many to be among the most bland and/or awkward looking vehicles this earth has ever seen, and people who buy Toyotas—at the very least, are not put off by the looks.
Do you think owning a Toyota defines a persons knowledge of style?,
Obviously not.
Bob
I'm making perfect sense. Your confusing PART-time 4wd with FULL-time 4wd, AWD in any form (including full-time 4wd) can make worse a low traction situation.
The more traction you use on the front wheels to move the vehicle, the less traction available for steering. So if you’re traveling in AWD/Full-time 4wd at speeds over 40 MPH and suddenly make a steering adjustment in slippery road conditions (On a rainy highway) the greater the chance of understeer or a spin-out. But that’s why all models of the ridge are equipped with VSC.
"You cannot combine VSC with SR5 package #8 or either of the TRD packages however."
You can get VSC on all models (except X-runner) including ones with tow packages and TRD packages.
http://www.toyota.com/vehicles/2005/tacoma/specs_access_cab.html
Go the bottom of this page and click on #8, it states that you can ONLY get:
"VSC + TRAC with Downhill Assist Control (DAC) and Hill Start Assist Control (HAC) [9] (4x4 V6 AT models) "
with the TRD package
"The full time 4wd is much better verses part time if you live in snow country. With part time you need to switch in and out of 4wd depending on the road. 4wd on the back road, 2wd on a main road, back to 4wd for an areas not plowed, ect. Imagine turning left at a light, hitting the gas and just spinning your rear wheels since the road is a bit icy and you forgot to put it in 4wd. With full time 4wd it's not an issue."
I've live in snow country (yes there is such thing as snow in SoCal) and (not sure if VTM-4 has a limmited slip but this is the way it happens on most AWD vehicles) AWD only works if all wheels have at least some traction otherwise its just a 2wd system. Luckily you have VSC to combat that problem as well.
"Imagine turning left at a light, hitting the gas and just spinning your rear wheels since the road is a bit icy" I would agree that AWD is this situation would get you going faster, but also keep in mind that with a part time system, while the wheels would spin, you would still move and have better steering control to boot. (BTW, tacomas VSC would not allow that wheel slip to occur in the first place)
Part-time 4wd will get you through unplowed roads better than any AWD system ever could. AWD is oriented so that the inconveniences of on road driving (spinning the wheels when turning a corner, lower traction going through mud puddles, more hp to gravel roads) don't slow you down. 4wd is designed to get you through rough terrain so you wont get stuck. Most people don't need 4wd capability, and that’s fine. But I would argue that RWD and FWD could get you to the same place AWD can, albeit a tad slower (and safer with tacomas VSC + Trac system).
"I agree, unless your truck is off road in the dirt and mud more than 50% of the time, unquestionably AWD with VSC is better. It would be nice to have 4Lo (we all want everything, dont we? It's part of being American I guess.), but from my experience thus far, (Deep dry sand) I will never need it in this vehicle."
If your off-road more than 50% of the time your gonna need a helluva lot more than a pickup truck. AWD with VSC may be better for daily around town driving as I've stated before but it is not more capable than any part-time 4wd system.
I drove it to a weekly biker meet and was actually forgiven for not being on one. For the first time in memory, my biker buddies actually talked about something other than V-twins and pegs.
I am curious as to the blue ones owned by men vs. women as the primary driver. I wish it had more blue in it like the s2000 or mini-van.
Blue owners, what has been the reaction to the color or are people still just amazed at the trunk and strange style?
When you said that 4WD is better than AWD at getting you unstuck is correct, but I don't think you know why. AWD allows for some wheel spin before activating the other wheels, making getting unstuck a jerky situation and near impossible to do the forward/back rocking maneuver smoothly. I currently own both an AWD vehicle and a 4WD vehicle and can attest to this. But the center and rear locking differential on the Ridgeline mimics all the advantages of 4WD.
A quote from Motor Trend Magazine: "The H2 is big, weighty, expensive, and thirsty. (And it needed a shift into low range to finish a hill climb the Volvo's high-tech AWD scrambled up without drama.)"
(Translation: that's your one warning.)
kcram - Pickups Host
I am too busy going to home depot, work, and the occasional fully-armed outdoor adventure. But, I cannot justify spending extra on a vehicle I think looks kinda odd. Maybe it will grow on me, but not yet.
The Tacoma has a horrible set of first year issues that cannot be ignored.
Is Honda that much better than Toyota nowadays or is the onsalught of RL complaints yet to come? I agree with an earlier post that the Honda engineers knew they had one shot at this, so they probably made darn sure it was manufactured right.
Toyota is too caught up in their reputation for quality to do anything about it. Will it hurt their sales? I doubt it. There are enough buyers out there that don't care about going to the dealer in the first three years. I do! I can't believe there is such a poor history of paint chipping on Toyota's, especially the new Taco. This alone is enough to keep me from buying. What's worse is the lack of acknowledgement by Toyota that there is a problem.
How about I buy neither and save my $$ until they fix the Taco or give the RL a facelift?
So far, 1000 K ms. & no problems with the RL, I am happy to report. :shades: But there are some controls ergonomic design could use a tune up.
LoL. I can think of a few other areas in life where this statement applies: I would much rather have an ugly vehicle that works wonderfully than a beautiful vehicle that is nothing but a headache.
All AWD systems have 3 differentials; the job of these mechanical devices is to manage the difference in speeds while your turning your vehicle. The reason you wouldn't be better off on that same icy hill climb is because differentials transfer torque to the axle with least resistance ( i.e. the spinning wheel). Unless you have some sort of electronic traction control system that uses the brakes to limit wheel spin, you’re not going anywhere. Also as a side note traction control systems waste torque as it transfers that energy into heat by using the brakes to slow down a wheel (i.e. don't try and pull someone out of a ditch with electronic traction control, you'll only get stuck yourself). Before you start calling people ignorant you might want to actually understand how the mechanics of the thing your talking about works.
Here's a good website to read up on how these systems work (they even have pictures for those that need to learn that way): http://www.4x4abc.com/4WD101/awd.html
I am still scratching my head wondering how durable the 19 clutch plates will be on either side of the Ridge's rear axle.
If I understand correctly, there is always somekind of slip on these plates until either rear diffy lock is engaged, or the 70% max torque transfer level happens.
Maybe someone needs to explain these clutch packs, I keep picturing them similar to the multiplate asbestos/steel units that I had in my Honda and Yamaha motorcycles. In which case, it is bad news to have continual slippage in a clutch.
John
Honda's VTM-4 is a different animal. It has two differentials. The one up front is wide open and uses only traction control to manage power to each front wheel. Not ideal, but better than a wide open diff. The diff in the back is responsible for two jobs. It can shift power fore and aft. It can also lock the rear diff from side to side. Realistically, you could say that Honda has squeezed two differentials into one diff housing. Anyway, that second job is fairly unique among AWD systems and is much more effective than simply managing power with the brakes. With the left and right clutch packs locked, both rear wheels are getting a full serving of torque with nothing holding them back.
As for the clutch packs, I've never read of someone having a problem with excessive wear and tear. It's a wet clutch pack system, so slippage is part of the design. And it's not like these packs are subjected to the same stresses as the clutch in a manual transmission. VTM-4 engages electronically within a fraction of a second. The rpms of the slack clutch plates and the powered clutch plates won't be very different. It's not like going from 4,000 rpms to 2,000 rpms.
John
However, I will be the last to say that this is better than that. You are getting into opinion and subjectiveness, and that is one road I don't recommend.
John
Ridgeline is perfect for trips to and from home depot carrying wood and tools through pot hole ridden streets through the city, Tacoma is great for the camping/fishing/offroad trips.
Both are light duty however... If you plan on doing any major towing get a Dodge or Ford.
I agree with the original poster. I don't think he means grassy fields at fairgrounds.
I currently own a '99 Jeep Wrangler Sport, 2001 Subaru Outback, and an '05 Tacoma.
The Outback is hands down my favorite on-road snow car, EVER! With the 5 speed manual tranny and true center diff, it's also a blast on wet or loose roads. However, the Jeep and Taco absolutely kill it in a muddy field, on a rocky trail, or a wet, loose, sandy beach.
American Subarus lack a 4WD low range, which is key in really sticky situations. The indie suspension is great on the road, and actually has BETTER static center ground clearance than the Jeep with 30" tires (no pumpkin on the Subie, and I haven't compared the Taco), but it gives much of this away as the suspension travels over obstacles. Solid axles act like a fulcrum, tilting the vehicle, but not giving away the clearance. Most indie suspension (except an H1, but that's $100k ) allows the body to stay closer to level, but it "squats", giving away the clearance and breakover angle. The squatting can also be a problem when towing.
The low profile tires (60 series on mine, AFAIK 65 series on a Forester) mounted on most Subarus also lack the sidewall height for true technical off-road performance, but work GREAT in on-road and "rally" type situations. Big, high, gummy sidewalls soak up rocks and shock without blowing beads and/or damaging rims, but they compromise dry pavement handling. I've always wanted to swap my 17" rim / 60 series tire combo for a 15" rim and a tire equalling the same diameter as the original combo and see how much better it behaved over tough stuff, but I've never gotten around to it. The 60 series are also not legal for many off-road beach permits, as they don't have enough sidewall height to spread out and still hold air when aired down for sand.
You may not have had problems, but I think if you spent some real time in all three of my vehicles, I wouldn't have much convincing to do. If only the Ouback had a LOW!
I use mine on freshly plowed fields where I need to accurately measure distance. Any wheel spin, and I get a bad measurement. My F-150 would require a tractor to get it out. One of the worse vehicles we had was an F-250 diesel Power stroke 4x4. The thing was so heavy it would just dig itself right into the loose dirt.
John
Let me bring this back around to the discussion at hand: Does the Ridgeline have the "float" advantage? Most likely not, but I have a feeling that the Ridge would make it through most anything a Subaru could (hhaha... or should?!) handle and probably a few things more. A moot point though, because we are approaching the realm of off-roading for which the Ridgeline was not designed. Why contrast it against other vehicles in tasks for which it was not designed to perform? It doesn't seem to make much sense to me. If we just agree that the Ridgeline was designed for "light to moderate" off-road situations and exceptional on-road safety and capability, we could move on to more productive discussions. I think it is far more appropriate to contrast the on-road capability of these two vehicles because we can all agree that both were designed for (and primarily see) such use.
As for safety, the 2005 taco has already earned 5 stars and has fine tuned VSC through the various SUV models that carry it standard.
Respectfully, No,No,No. I speak directly from experience on this. The Ridgeline has excellent performance in deep sand and mud. It can handle anything that it's approach and departure angle and over 8" ground clearance allow it to. Some muddy field won't stop the RL. I've had it in deep dry sand where the sand is scraping the undercarriage, and it plowed through like a champ. I just can't let comments like "but just like past honda's she just don't cut the mustard off the pavement." slide by, because it's just not true or accurate. I know better.
---------------------------
A.M.E.N. Right from an owners mouth and not from an outsider who's only contact with the Ridge is a 15 minute actual or 1 hour fictional test drive :P
I would understand why Toyota Tacoma owners would insist that the Taco is a better choice, after all it's the motor trend truck of the year. To bad though because Toyota has the bad habit of grabbing the limelight in the absence of a Honda compettitor.Think Odyssey, the revamp Sienna only managed to claim top spot when going head to head with an aging Odyssey. Now that the Odyssey is all new, it's the top dog again in the minivan class year 2005 according to CR.
Car and driver has made the Pilot its SUV choice for years 03,04, and 05.(not bad at all for a newcomer, like a back to back to back sweep from a rookie).The Highlander was only in the limelight in the Pilots absence.I wouldn't be surprise that the Motortrend truck of the year award the Tacoma has on it's hands is on borrowed time.MOTORTREND 2006 TRUCK OF THE YEAR:Honda Ridgeline, folks get used to that sound.
Honda is a small company, while Toyota can afford to throw billions without denting i'ts pockets. The limited budget of Honda is the reason why it approaches and researches something so cautiously, coz if it bombs it's a serious dent to their coffers.The Ridgeline for all the crap it receives is one serious truck, Hondas' entry baby into the truck market that could make or break it's future in the hearts and pockets of truck enthusiast, thus the top notch packaging and all around capability.Much like an MVP of any sport, it doesn't excell in one or two facets of the game like towing or offroading but does well in everything. :shades:
Did I mention that this truck is built by Honda?
At the North American International Auto Show in Detroit earlier this month, Bob Lutz, GM’s vice chairman, brought a large contingent to inspect Ridgeline. He told Flint: It’s the best “packaging” of any vehicle he has ever seen, meaning the best layout and use of space.
Lutz praises competitors sparingly, especially those from abroad.
If the Ridgeline does prove to be a game-changer, it’s likely that Honda will need more production capacity in North America, which is already beginning to approach capacity. In December the company said it should reach capacity of 1.4 million vehicles by 2006.
A big splash by Ridgeline also may spur a new crop of pickups even more quickly from the competition, models with more clever use of space, a friendlier feel and somewhat smaller engines.
Quote from gary Flint, former engineer for GM for 15 years:
"What we really wanted to do," said Gary Flint, chief engineer for the Ridgeline, "is build a truck that didn't stink. We felt most other trucks stink."
Well then let us hope it does..... just as long as other mfgrs do not follow suit on its aesthetics!
Ha! you should have seen the look on the faces of my fellow Kawasaki Vulcan owners when I showed up for a meeting wearing a Honda cap! LOL!
So far I have not seen any more Ridglines on the road. I am told I am the first one to buy here in Winnipeg. Maybe I'm the only one!
What is the rollover angle for the Ridgeline? I have noticed it has a wide stance relative to height when compared to the Toyota, or any other 4X4 pick up. So where is the center of gravity? I'm no off roader but I have seen SUVs loose control on a slippery highway and end up in the rhubarb with the shiny side down. I'll bet the RL will have less of a tendancy to end wheels up under the same circumstances.
I still have my previous 91 Toy truck and still love it. I could never bear to part with it. You just don't get rid of a vehicle that has been that reliable, but the RL I felt was a much better release and so well thought out.
As far as roll over angle I'm not sure, but doubt it would. It has a wider wheel base. I think it would be less prone to do it.
The Ridge may be inferior to the Taco, in terms of offroading, towing and maybe the looks (subjective). Safetywise, though not tested yet, hands down it would rollover the Tacoma.I'll take safety over looks, towing and offroading anyday.
1. 05 Sienna.
http://www.nhtsa.gov/NCAP/Cars/3270.html
Chance of Rollover 15%
Static Stability Factor 1.25
Dynamic Test Result No-tip
Drive All wheel drive
Tire Size P235/70R16
2. 05 Odyssey
http://www.nhtsa.gov/NCAP/Cars/3100.html
Chance of Rollover 14%
Static Stability Factor 1.30
Dynamic Test Result No-tip
Drive Front wheel drive
Tire Size 235/65R16
3. 05 Pilot
http://www.nhtsa.gov/NCAP/Cars/3336.html
Chance of Rollover 15%
Static Stability Factor 1.25
Dynamic Test Result No-tip
Drive All wheel drive
Tire Size P235/70R16
Lutz praises competitors sparingly, especially those from abroad.
If the Ridgeline does prove to be a game-changer, it’s likely that Honda will need more production capacity in North America, which is already beginning to approach capacity. In December the company said it should reach capacity of 1.4 million vehicles by 2006.
A big splash by Ridgeline also may spur a new crop of pickups even more quickly from the competition, models with more clever use of space, a friendlier feel and somewhat smaller engines.
Yep, I couldn't agree more. Lutz is spot-on on this call.
Bob
I've owned three Hondas in the past 13 years and three Toyotas in the same period of time. Presently, I own one of each. Each make has some things I prefer and some things that I do not prefer. I'm not necessarily loyal to any make. When I'm in the market for a new vehicle, I see what is available and make a decision on what I like. I will say that I've scratched choices because of looks, features, cost, etc. I've also added choices because of the same. Just like most other purchases; whether it is clothes, electronics, or even your home. Just my two cents.