Most think they're totally unnecessary on a modest-height vehicle like the Pilot and for anyone reasonable tall, they interfere with getting into the car enough that you'll try and step around them, which virtually guarantees a dirty pants leg.
Just bought an '06 EX-L RES yesterday, and observed how my 5 yr old got in. It is higher than our '04 Sienna, but she had no problem getting in with holding on to the seat, and pulling herself up. She can't simply step up without pulling herself up. The 3 year old cannot yet, no big deal, we lift her up and put her in her seat.
IMO, those running boards/side steps just interfere more than help. Plus, you can always add them later if you decide to get them. Enjoy!
I had a Suburban when my kids were smaller and felt I needed them for them to get in and out of it. Now my kids are 9 and 11 and have no problems with the Pilot. In fact, I find running boards a hassel because it's a 'two step' to get into and out of the truck, and they do get your pants dirty. Even when loading my roof box I don't find them very helpful- I just end up opening the door and standing on the door sill or the rear tire.
Some people like the appearance- if you do, great. Just get used to a higher dry cleaning bill!
My 3-year old has no problems getting in and out. She loves to climb, and is 40 inches tall though. The running boards would be a big waste of money for us.
If you need to use the third row every day, then put one car seat inthe middle and the other behind the driver. Otherwise access will be a pain. "Jr." will need to jump over the second row to get in the back or you need to disconnect/re-connect the child seat to let them back there.
Imagine muddy boots climbing over the second row... :surprise:
I suppose you could let them in from the rear hatch and leave 50% of the third row folded. Just doesn't seem handy to me. How often does your 5year old need help getting buckled in?
We have 3 kids in our Tahoe. One behind the driver (child seat), one in the middle (booster), and #3 can sit in the second row or go back to the third row.
I have a two year old who we place in a car seat and have it anchored in the middle of the back seat. I am not sure what the issue is here. The seat we have has like a lap type belt that we clip to each of the inside latches in the seat backs. When I place it there, I hook up the seat to both of these latches and place me knees in the car seat and place all of my weight on the car seat. I then pull the car seat strap tight and get off the seat. The seat is VERY snug and does not move whatsoever. I also went to one of those local police type fairs and had the police officers check my seat and they said it was an outstanding job. Now I am not sure what type of car seat you have, but the center shoulder strap in the back seat of the Pilot is not being used with this type of seat. The lap belt provided with the seat keeps it snuggly fit to the Pilot's seat....and of course the 5 point harness system keeps my little girl in the seat. It is actually a breeze to take it in and out of the Pilot. Especially after doing it so many times! Good luck!
Honestly, the third row seat in a Pilot is completly useless. You really can only fit a dog in there, and I think that it's a waste of weight. It isn't the safest to put a child in the third rows so I recommend to avoid putting anyone in the third row seat. Mini-vans, and larger SUV's such as the Toyota Landcruiser are fine for third rows. But I do not recommend puting anyone in the third row of a Pilot since it is small, and not the safest.
If your kids and yourself can get in comfortably, it's not necessary. But, a benefit to having the side steps is if when you are parked in a parking lot, and another car accidently hits their door on your car, it would it the side step, not the body of the car. If you do get the side steps, make sure to get ones made out of stainless steel. Others rust. Steel Horse is a good brand if you decide. They are expensive. It's up to you.
Actually the 3rd row in the Pilot is quite usable for children and even short adults. It's far more comfortable than a Landcruiser/LX 470 (parents have the Lexus) which is actually quite tight. It's not as comfy as a Suburban or Sequoia (I've had both) or the large minivans, but then, the Pilot is not nearly as big as these vehicles, including these new 'mini' vans which are huge, BTW (dimensions are almost equivalent to my Sequoia or Expedition).
That is simply incorrect. That or you have not tried one recently. Yes the 3rd row is not as big as some other vehicles but I am 6'1" and I can easily fit back there (especially if the 2nd row is "scooted" forward). Would I want to take a 10-hour trip back there - no. Would it be fine for an hour - yes. My five year old rides in the 3rd row of my MDX (which doesn't have the sliding 2nd row) all of the time and never complains.
As to safety, I am sure it's not as safe as the 2nd row. However, the Odyssey only had probably 6-8 inches more of space behind its third row. You think that's going to make all of the difference? :confuse:
I'm 6' tall and am comfortable in the 3rd row (with the 2nd row part way forward). Your statement about "the third row seat in a Pilot is completly useless" is incorrect. Have you ever been in a Pilot?
Yes I have been in a Pilot many times. But I still think that it is useless. In my opinion, it seems like a waste of extra weight for the car, un-necessary extra money, and I do not think that if I have guests, that they would be willing to sit there. Yes I understand that for short distances, it would be acceptable, but overall, I do not see the need for it. I do think the Pilot is a great car, but I just don't agree with manufacturers putting third row seats in midsize Suvs.
You can't give away a mid-size SUV these days without the third-row. You may not like them, but you're in the decided minority and the mfgs cater to the majority.
My guests are plenty willing to ride back there when the alternative is walking. I think you're letting the tail wag the dog to think that these seats have to suitable for long-term occupancy by adults to be useful - they're typically used by kids and for short periods, and they're VERY useful for this.
It is with Nav. DLO can be set to 87.9 and this is a recommneded frequency for noise-free reception. AUX connections are very expensive and require installation. I have installed DLO, as you see, in center console, so it very easily accessable. The volume is still controlled by regular radio controls.
Can you say Kiddie Carpool!!! The third row rocks!! We can take my 2 kids plus 4 of their friends in our Pilot, and we all fit quite comfortably!! Clearly the third row is intended for kids, adults in a pinch. If our 2000 Subaru Outback had a third row, I would not have had to sell it!!
I agree. I have a third kid on the way so realistically that eliminated many SUVs right away including Murano, RX, and others. Without the third row, they are not even realistic options.
So I am left with full size SUVs (which I did not want), minivans or a few mid-size SUVs. If not for the very usable (especially for kids) third row in the Pilot, I would be getting a minivan without question. Of course, Honda would still be getting my business
Look at all the new midsize suv's (even the small ones too) - highlander, rav4, santa fe. They all offer 3rd row seats because the market asked for it. And these are all smaller than the pilot! IIRC the suzuki XL7 was among the first midsize suv to offer it. Buyers choose models based on their needs. If you don't need the 3rd row, then fold it flat. If you don't like the pilot, buy another suv.
Does anyone here have two carseats and a passenger sitting in the second row at the same time? Is it comfortable or is it really tight? I know the best way to find out is to go to the dealer, but just trying to get everyone else's experiences so far. Thanks
right now I have 2 Graco Turbobooster seats and there is plenty of room for an adult in the middle, or at either end if you move the booster to the middle. Given this situation, I would say if you had car seats instead of boosters, it would also be no problem.
I have 2 carseats and I can fit a passenger in between comfortably. We're expecting our third in 2 weeks so we'll move the older 2 to the third row and my wife and newborn will be in the 2nd row. We live in Chicago and we wanted a vehicle that allows seating options. Our other car is an 04 Camry V6 SE. It's a sweet ride, but it gets tight in the rear seat and I can't fit anyone in between the 2 car seats. We considered a minivan and I was close to buying the Mazda 5, but the wife wanted AWD which wasn't an option. The Toyota Sienna offers awd but it costs even more than the pilot. We cross shopped and researched and always came back to the pilot. I believe it's the best value out there.
I own a 2004 Chrysler Pacifica that has had a lot of service issues and I'm shopping for a replacement. Although the Pilot is smaller than the Chrysler, it seems reasonably comfortable and appears to be a high quality vehicle. Any comments on 2nd and 3rd row seating? I have 2 kids, one a 10 year-old boy and the other a 14 year old girl. The 3rd row would be for their friends going on local activities. How is the 2nd row for longer trips for bigger kids or adults?
I'm considering some bigger SUV's like the GMC Envoy XT and Chevy Trailblazer XLT, but the gas-mileage issue and general road-test reviews citing poor handling make me hesitant on buying one of them.
If people-hauling is your primary use and you don't need the AWD, I'd go with a Odyssey minivan.
The Pilot's third row is fine for kids and short trips, but no, it's not really acceptable for longer trips with adults or big kids.
I'd avoid the Trailblazer, but I'd certainly look at the new Tahoe. The Pilot is not a great handling car, so I don't think you'll lose much there. The big issue with cars like the Tahoe is a couple fewer MPG in everyday use and the reliability issues.
I have 2003 Pilot and I am thinking about trading for a 2006. I am curious if anyone out there has done the same and whether they have noticed any difference in the cars themselves (comfort,ride, etc) and the quality (fit, finish, body panel alignment, etc) of the Canadian vs. Alabama productions. My 2003 has been basically flawless except for the recalls handled happily by my local service department. I'm almost afraid to trade.
I'd avoid the Trailblazer, but I'd certainly look at the new Tahoe. The Pilot is not a great handling car, so I don't think you'll lose much there. The big issue with cars like the Tahoe is a couple fewer MPG in everyday use and the reliability issues.
At least on paper the 07 Tahoe is only 1 mpg behind the Pilot. 15 city and 21 Highway. Reliability is good on the pre-07 ones, in fact one of the better ones for full sized SUVs. for 2007 who knows...lots of new items.
For those wanting 3 kids or 2 kids and an Adult in one row the extra 5 or so inches is nice.
Will a real spare tire fit OK where the temporary one is now located? I don't feel comfortable without a real rim & tire. Outside of this, the features and driving on this 2006 pilot are wonderful. Typical Honda, we have a Acura and Goldwing. :
I cannot be certain on the 06 Pilot but my 2001 MDX is very similar and I use a full size spare (replaced the donut one). It is partially visible from the rear but otherwise you will never notice the difference - it fits fine. I believe many other Pilot owners have done this as well.
I am searching for a mid-sized SUV and I am down to the Pilot and the Highlander I think. For those who own a Pilot and considered the Highland, I would like to know what swayed you.
My situation is we already have an Ody, and 4 kids, and my other car is a sedan which can not hold 4 and barely 3. So I need a vehicle on the oft occasion I need to get all 4 kids.
Mileage is not so much an issue as my daily commute is less then 10 miles round trip. I am looking at the EX-L 3rd row.
I was leaning towards the Highlander, but I recently saw a pilot and was quite impressed with the inside.
I just returned a leased 2003 EX for a 2006 EXL. The leather is nice, as are the heated seats What my wife really likes is the sun roof that wasn't available on the 2003. We both think the 2006 is quieter and the ride a bit less choppy. I'm not sure if they did any tuning or added any extra soundproofing, but I swear both are better. I think they bumped HP a couple of notches, but what I really wish they would have done is squeezed an extra MPG or two out of it! Overall, I'm glad we replaced the car - the '03 was nice, but there seems to be a bit more polish on the '06.
The two vehicles are so close in spec, reliability, size, capabilities, etc. it's hard to come up with a hard/fast reason to prefer one over the other. In the end, I think you drive them both and decide based on which feels better to you. I think the Toyota is slightly sportier and can be equipped to be a little more luxurious, while the Pilot wins on the offering a little more room and utlity. Basically, if you want a little more luxury car in your SUV, you go Highlander; if you want a little more truck, you go Pilot. This is reflected in their roots - the Highlander is based on a car platform (the Camry) while the Pilot is based on a minivan platform (Odyssey).
I don't think there's that much of a difference in platform source. Both the Pilot and Odyssey are based on the Accord pltform, so the Pilot is as much a car-based SUV as the Highlander. Now the Accord drives differently from a Camry, so the Pilot and Highlander will too.
I chose the Pilot because I didn't feel the Highlander had the same interior space. The main difference is width. Highlander is 71.9 inches wide, while the Pilot is 77. That extra 5 inches was enough to allow us to easily put 3 toddler/infant seats in the 2nd row, which is rare and what we need. The extra width makes parking lots tougher to deal with but worthwhile. If you are going to drive with 4 kids, check out the 2nd row of both SUV's with kids strapped in. You'll notice the difference when fastening them into their seats!
I agree. I briefly looked at the Highlander Hybrid but realized that I needed the extra room of the Pilot. If you do not or like to drive a vehicle that feels a bit lighter than the Highlander may be a good choice (although I would check out a RAV4 which has nearly as much room and handles better). Also, I would probably regret getting a Highlander in 06 only to see a totally new design in 07 (Pilot design probably has another 3 years).
What I would really like to get is an EXL Pilot HYBRID for about 33K. Imagine, city 27/hwy 25 with 265hp. :shades: Honda, are you listening? I know there is talk about an MDX hybrid in 07 but I just cannot wait that long (plus it's likely to be over 40K).
We're probably splitting hairs, but my understanding is that the first gen Odyssey (95-98) was Accord-based, but the 2nd and beyond generations (99-current) were based on a new light-truck platform developed by Honda, which is now the underpinnings of the Odyssey, Pilot, MDX, and Ridgeline. I'm sure this LT platform shares technology with the Accord; these platform boundaries are gray lines, not black and white. Wikipedia says this also:
In any event, my point was that the Highlander tends to drive more car-like, and the Pilot drives more minivan-light-truck-like, whatever that means. The big win for the Honda, is like all of you are saying, more space inside.
After ownimg mine for several months, my biggest issue with it is how "big" it drives. It's no bigger than most competing models, but it drives bigger - it feels large and somewhat clumsy/bulky behind the wheel. I don't get a trace of sportiness out of it. Not that a Highlander is truly sporty, but the Honda, competent as it is in most respects, just feel bulky behind the wheel. I respect how good it does things more than enjoy how it drives. And I still like it a great deal - the Pilot is a car that I drive to accomplish the transportation mission, not to drive for fun.
I drive both vehicles all the time. I disagree with you on a couple of things. I agree the Pilot is less car like than the Highlander. The Pilot is a much better handler, at least our 2003, once you get the poor handling Goodyear Integrity tires off. A stiffer sidewall tire makes the Pilot handle much better. The Highlander has a softer suspension and is slightly quieter, but it handles like a soft Buick. The brake pedal on the Highlander is mushy. I think it handles like a poor handling Camry so I have not been impressed.
Although the Pilot is not a great handler, I don't know of any SUV as large or larger as the Pilot that handles better. It is wider than the Highlander, Trailblazer, and Explorer. It outhandles any of the larger SUVs such as Expedition, Suburban, and Sequoia.
The width of seating in Pilot dwarfs the Highlander. My family member who has the Highlander that I drive often does not need extra space so it fits her well. If you drive with 2 or more rear passengers, the Pilot is much roomier.
Sorry, we have to agree to disagree. I've driven the Highlander back-to-back with the Pilot and I think it handles much more crisply.
This is Edmunds' editors assessment of the Pilot's handling and I agree:
Road Test Editor Brian Moody says: ... Although I like the Pilot quite a bit, when driving it back-to-back with the other vehicles in its class I was surprised by how big, heavy and numb it felt on the road. It's clearly the biggest of the bunch, and it offers the much desired third-row seat, but its size seems to result in clumsy handling. That really turned me off.
I've put Michelin LTX tires on my 2006, replacing the stock Bridgestone Duelers. This has helped.
I am a Highlander owner who has driven Pilots and I completly disagree. The brakes are not mushy at all - the 03 Highlanders had the mushy brakes, then Toyota improved it to a good feel. The Highlander does not have a soft suspension. Again, that was the 03 Highlanders and below. Since 04 to current, the Highlander has a much tighter suspension. In 03, the roll-over rating was 3 star for the Highlander, and then went up to 4 star. The Pilot does handle better because of it's winder stance. But the 04+ Highlanders do not have mushy brakes, and a soft suspension. Believe me, I got rid of my previous 02 Avalon because it had a soft suspension.
Yeah. In 2003, I test drove the 03 but didn't like it. Then in 04 everything seemed fine. But usually, Toyota does not make very hard suspensions - they are usually in between soft and hard. Honda usually makes hard suspensions, which I like. The Pilots, have a hard suspension, but soft dampers. So if you go on a bump, the car slowly goes down, then slowly up. The Pilot is softer than the Highlader, but still tight. In my opinion, the Pilot feels in better control when going over bumps than the Highlander.
Just curious, Mark--Do you have an LX? For some reason I'm thinking the LX comes with the Bridgestone's and the EX with Integrity's.
If you do have the LX, are you happy with the seat comfort and coverings, and did you add any accessories to "upgrade" its features, that you can tell us about? I know this question is more appropriate for the Mod and Accessories thread, but I wanted to ask you directly. Never mind if you don't have an LX. Thanks, Will
Sorry Will, no, I have the EX. My understanding is that it's a crap shoot whether you get the BS's or GY's on any given car, regardless of trim. For awhile, someone hypothesized that the Canada cars have BS's and the Alabama cars have GY's but I think this was proven false. The latest I heard was that the AWD cars are typically built in Canada and the 2WD cars in Alabama, but I don't know if this is true.
Well, decided to test out how many people the Pilot really could hold. Did a 5 hour trip from Seattle to Whistler- 4 adults, 4 kids, and other than some car sickness they all did just fine. I put 3 8-10 year old kids in the 3rd row and they had no complaints (comfort wise, anyway ).
Of course, we couldn't have packed all their stuff too- there's enough room for about 4-5 peoples luggage (efficiently packed) so the extra luggage and skis went into my friend's truck.
The Pilot did just fine climbing up the winding road to Whistler and was quite comfortable for all. AWD up in the snow was nice to have also.
I choose the Pilot for Simulat reasons too over the Highlander. The Pilot drove better and it looks 100 times nicer then the Highlander. And you get a lot more with the Pilot.
I am looking into buying a 2006 Honda PILOT this summer and have been reading reviews all over here and other web sites. I have noticed that the MPG people write in about are extreme. Some people say they get as high as 20-26 mpg average between cty and hyw while others are complaing they only get 10-15 mpg. Are the people that are getting 20-26 mpg driving 40-50 mph? And are the people that get 10-15 mpg are they driving around in a low gear with maybe their parking brake on? I would like to here feed back from people who drive normal , 65-75 mph , going to work , play , getting stuck in traffic, ETC , just the normal every day drive that we all do. THANKS! :confuse:
I'm not surprised by the variance in reports. Think about all the factors involved: traffic, congestion, terrain, gas brand, lead-foots vs. egg-shell drivers, braking habits, length of trips, climate, winds, loads, roof racks, trailering, going in to get a cup of coffee while the car warms up, tire inflation pressures, tire brands... the list just goes on and on.
And many folks also mis-report mileage, either due to math errors or just because they want to embelish their report, both to make it good and bad. Some report what the computer reports (quite often optimistic), others do the fillup-to-fillup math (most accurate), others just look at the gauge and make an estimate (very inaccurate). And even if you go to the trouble to manually compute mileage, you really need to average it over several fillups to filter out the noise from different pump cutoff limits and how the vehicle was sitting when it was filled up.
If you want "normal" mileage without all these outlyers, just ignore everybody and use the EPA numbers. That's exactly why the cars are tested and the numbers are reported - to provide a scientifically accurate estimate of what you can expect in city and highway driving.
Now most people don't do quite as well as these numbers suggest, but they're fine for comparing different vehicles. With the 17/22 ratings of the Pilot AWD, the EPA would tell you that 90% of owners probably get between 15 and 18 city, and 19-23 highway.
FWIIW, here's the numbers on my 06 EX AWD: 14-16 mpg in day-to-day urban driving, with mostly short trips in very hilly terrain. And about 20-22 in steady 60-80 mph freeway driving. I'm slightly disappointed and hope it improves a bit with mileage.
Comments
They look ridiculous too.
Skip 'em.
All subjective opinions of course.
- Mark
IMO, those running boards/side steps just interfere more than help. Plus, you can always add them later if you decide to get them. Enjoy!
-Howard
Some people like the appearance- if you do, great. Just get used to a higher dry cleaning bill!
tom
Imagine muddy boots climbing over the second row... :surprise:
I suppose you could let them in from the rear hatch and leave 50% of the third row folded. Just doesn't seem handy to me. How often does your 5year old need help getting buckled in?
We have 3 kids in our Tahoe. One behind the driver (child seat), one in the middle (booster), and #3 can sit in the second row or go back to the third row.
--jay
Functionally, however, I will agree that the "dirty pant leg syndrome" is a potential problem (I have been very careful so far).
They do help when you are washing the top of the car.
Good luck!
Here is a picture of my set up
http://www.hondapilot.org/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=13013&perpage=15&hig- hlight=DLO&pagenumber=2
Is your Pilot a 2006 EX-L (Without Navi/RES)?
Did you find you had a free AUX connection?
I'm trying to figure out why Honda and a couple of other third-party providers are saying their products don't work with the 06 EX-L
tom
As to safety, I am sure it's not as safe as the 2nd row. However, the Odyssey only had probably 6-8 inches more of space behind its third row. You think that's going to make all of the difference? :confuse:
My guests are plenty willing to ride back there when the alternative is walking. I think you're letting the tail wag the dog to think that these seats have to suitable for long-term occupancy by adults to be useful - they're typically used by kids and for short periods, and they're VERY useful for this.
- Mark
So I am left with full size SUVs (which I did not want), minivans or a few mid-size SUVs. If not for the very usable (especially for kids) third row in the Pilot, I would be getting a minivan without question. Of course, Honda would still be getting my business
Buyers choose models based on their needs. If you don't need the 3rd row, then fold it flat. If you don't like the pilot, buy another suv.
Or maybe you're just trolling?
right now I have 2 Graco Turbobooster seats and there is plenty of room for an adult in the middle, or at either end if you move the booster to the middle. Given this situation, I would say if you had car seats instead of boosters, it would also be no problem.
-Howard
I'm considering some bigger SUV's like the GMC Envoy XT and Chevy Trailblazer XLT, but the gas-mileage issue and general road-test reviews citing poor handling make me hesitant on buying one of them.
The Pilot's third row is fine for kids and short trips, but no, it's not really acceptable for longer trips with adults or big kids.
I'd avoid the Trailblazer, but I'd certainly look at the new Tahoe. The Pilot is not a great handling car, so I don't think you'll lose much there. The big issue with cars like the Tahoe is a couple fewer MPG in everyday use and the reliability issues.
I'd look at the Sequoia too.
- Mark
At least on paper the 07 Tahoe is only 1 mpg behind the Pilot. 15 city and 21 Highway. Reliability is good on the pre-07 ones, in fact one of the better ones for full sized SUVs. for 2007 who knows...lots of new items.
For those wanting 3 kids or 2 kids and an Adult in one row the extra 5 or so inches is nice.
My situation is we already have an Ody, and 4 kids, and my other car is a sedan which can not hold 4 and barely 3. So I need a vehicle on the oft occasion I need to get all 4 kids.
Mileage is not so much an issue as my daily commute is less then 10 miles round trip. I am looking at the EX-L 3rd row.
I was leaning towards the Highlander, but I recently saw a pilot and was quite impressed with the inside.
Thanks for your thoughts.
I just bought a Pilot and was in the same predicament. I bought the Pilot because:
1. Better value when you add everything up. Pilots can be had for invoice or lower these days.
2. Highlander side curtain airbags DO NOT extend to the third row.
3. Highlander third row is not 60/40.
4. Highlander third row is not as roomy as Pilot's
5. Highlander is a 7 passenger, Pilot is 8 mainly because Highlander is much narrower.
6. I am 6'7", and did not fit well (headroom) in Highlander with sunroof.
Hope this helps!
-Howard
- Mark
I chose the Pilot because I didn't feel the Highlander had the same interior space. The main difference is width. Highlander is 71.9 inches wide, while the Pilot is 77. That extra 5 inches was enough to allow us to easily put 3 toddler/infant seats in the 2nd row, which is rare and what we need. The extra width makes parking lots tougher to deal with but worthwhile. If you are going to drive with 4 kids, check out the 2nd row of both SUV's with kids strapped in. You'll notice the difference when fastening them into their seats!
What I would really like to get is an EXL Pilot HYBRID for about 33K. Imagine, city 27/hwy 25 with 265hp. :shades: Honda, are you listening? I know there is talk about an MDX hybrid in 07 but I just cannot wait that long (plus it's likely to be over 40K).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honda_Odyssey
In any event, my point was that the Highlander tends to drive more car-like, and the Pilot drives more minivan-light-truck-like, whatever that means. The big win for the Honda, is like all of you are saying, more space inside.
After ownimg mine for several months, my biggest issue with it is how "big" it drives. It's no bigger than most competing models, but it drives bigger - it feels large and somewhat clumsy/bulky behind the wheel. I don't get a trace of sportiness out of it. Not that a Highlander is truly sporty, but the Honda, competent as it is in most respects, just feel bulky behind the wheel. I respect how good it does things more than enjoy how it drives. And I still like it a great deal - the Pilot is a car that I drive to accomplish the transportation mission, not to drive for fun.
- Mark
Although the Pilot is not a great handler, I don't know of any SUV as large or larger as the Pilot that handles better. It is wider than the Highlander, Trailblazer, and Explorer. It outhandles any of the larger SUVs such as Expedition, Suburban, and Sequoia.
The width of seating in Pilot dwarfs the Highlander. My family member who has the Highlander that I drive often does not need extra space so it fits her well. If you drive with 2 or more rear passengers, the Pilot is much roomier.
This is Edmunds' editors assessment of the Pilot's handling and I agree:
Road Test Editor Brian Moody says:
... Although I like the Pilot quite a bit, when driving it back-to-back with the other vehicles in its class I was surprised by how big, heavy and numb it felt on the road. It's clearly the biggest of the bunch, and it offers the much desired third-row seat, but its size seems to result in clumsy handling. That really turned me off.
I've put Michelin LTX tires on my 2006, replacing the stock Bridgestone Duelers. This has helped.
- Mark
If you do have the LX, are you happy with the seat comfort and coverings, and did you add any accessories to "upgrade" its features, that you can tell us about? I know this question is more appropriate for the Mod and Accessories thread, but I wanted to ask you directly. Never mind if you don't have an LX.
Thanks,
Will
- Mark
Of course, we couldn't have packed all their stuff too- there's enough room for about 4-5 peoples luggage (efficiently packed) so the extra luggage and skis went into my friend's truck.
The Pilot did just fine climbing up the winding road to Whistler and was quite comfortable for all. AWD up in the snow was nice to have also.
tom
I would like to here feed back from people who drive normal , 65-75 mph , going to work , play , getting stuck in traffic, ETC , just the normal every day drive that we all do. THANKS! :confuse:
And many folks also mis-report mileage, either due to math errors or just because they want to embelish their report, both to make it good and bad. Some report what the computer reports (quite often optimistic), others do the fillup-to-fillup math (most accurate), others just look at the gauge and make an estimate (very inaccurate). And even if you go to the trouble to manually compute mileage, you really need to average it over several fillups to filter out the noise from different pump cutoff limits and how the vehicle was sitting when it was filled up.
If you want "normal" mileage without all these outlyers, just ignore everybody and use the EPA numbers. That's exactly why the cars are tested and the numbers are reported - to provide a scientifically accurate estimate of what you can expect in city and highway driving.
Now most people don't do quite as well as these numbers suggest, but they're fine for comparing different vehicles. With the 17/22 ratings of the Pilot AWD, the EPA would tell you that 90% of owners probably get between 15 and 18 city, and 19-23 highway.
FWIIW, here's the numbers on my 06 EX AWD: 14-16 mpg in day-to-day urban driving, with mostly short trips in very hilly terrain. And about 20-22 in steady 60-80 mph freeway driving. I'm slightly disappointed and hope it improves a bit with mileage.
- Mark