Honda says it's sticking by Ridgeline

[93JC]

It can be inferred from the abysmal sales numbers that, quite frankly, few people want a Ridgeline as it's configured.

I think the Ridgeline is a good (if not old) idea that is poorly executed. It still gets shitty fuel economy, has a shitty interior, looks like shit, drives like a boat, etc. That it is slightly better in some of these respects compared to its competition obviously doesn't matter, otherwise the Ridgeline would be very popular.

I wouldn't call it an abject failure, but it's not far off.

[Mustangfan2003]

I think Ford had played with the idea of building a car based replacement for the Ranger.  I think they could pull it off if they could make it more affordable than the Ridgeline. 

[GoCougs]

The Ridgeline was never intended to be a volume seller or to steal any appreciable sales from Detroit. It was primarily targeted at Honda-philes who wanted basic hauling, towing and AWD capability but didn't want to drive domestic or a lumbering solid axle BoF beastie.

[GoCougs]

For me, the styling is a killer but mostly the drive train isn't up to snuff. It's butter smooth and performs well but the equivalently powered Tacoma feels far stronger and on paper is much quicker vehicle. This is mostly owing to Honda's AT, which are major power suckers.

[Byteme]

The Ridgeline was never intended to be a volume seller or to steal any appreciable sales from Detroit. It was primarily targeted at Honda-philes who wanted basic hauling, towing and AWD capability but didn't want to drive domestic or a lumbering solid axle BoF beastie.

Honda had high hopes for 50,000+ per year and in 2005 ramped up production to 80,000 annual sales.   I suspect sales of 16K annually is a bit disappointing.  Road testers from the time of introduction weren't  uniformly impressed either.

http://www.carspin.net/forums/index.php?topic=396.0

[FoMoJo]

Whoops, typo on my part  Ridgeline weight 4,504.  So yes, lighter, in part because it has  shorter bed which isn't as useful as a longer bed.   

Have you seen the 'frame' on a Ridgeline.  It looks like stamped sheetmetal; about 16 guage. 

They had a stripped platform/frame section on display at the local auto show the year it was introduced - I forget which year it was.  I guess they thought it would impress people who were looking to buy a truck.  Imo, it was a big mistake to expose it as anyone who wanted a truck would look at it and think...this isn't a truck, it's just a Pilot with the back cut off.

[Rupert]

The cute ute of trucks. At least it's got a bed.

[Byteme]

Honda had high hopes for 50,000+ per year and in 2005 ramped up production to 80,000 annual sales.   I suspect sales of 16K annually is a bit disappointing.  Road testers from the time of introduction weren't  uniformly impressed either.

http://www.carspin.net/forums/index.php?topic=396.0

In fact I found this in the Ridgeline owner's club site.  Note their Honda Chief Engineer was talking about a potential annual market of 100,000.   Obviously Ridgeline sales never took off like Honda had hoped it would.

The Ridgeline has exceeded Honda's goal and still has 2 months to go.

http://www.pickuptruck.com/html/autoshows/naias2006/honda/ridgeline/page1.html

Following a slow start, the Ridgeline has exceeded Honda?s sales expectations. Honda had projected sales of 50,000 units in the first 12 months.  ?December was our peak month,? said Gary Flint, the chief engineer on the Ridgeline who spoke with PUTC after the award was announced at the North American International Auto Show. ?So far we?ve sold about 47,000 units and it?s been on sale since March 1. That?s just in the United States. We?ve also sold about 8,000 in Canada.?

Flint attributed the sluggish early numbers to introducing a ?unique vehicle? into a conservative marketplace.

?We feel we?ve finally got to the point where the market understands it,? said Flint. ?But there?s still a significant part of the market that isn?t aware of the vehicle.?

Industry observers have questioned the Ridgeline?s high starting price when compared to compact pickup market.

?We never really targeted the compact truck set,? explained Flint. ?If you look at the really narrow segment that compares to a fully equipped 4-door crew cab compact truck, Ridgeline is the best selling vehicle out there. But that?s really a very narrow market.?Flint said he sees future customers coming out fullsize SUVs and pickups ?because of some of the negative experiences they?ve had.?
?I think the market potential is about double where we?re at now,? added Flint.

[Mustangfan2003]

Who buys a truck from a motorcycle company anyway?

[GoCougs]

Have you seen the 'frame' on a Ridgeline.  It looks like stamped sheetmetal; about 16 guage.  

They had a stripped platform/frame section on display at the local auto show the year it was introduced - I forget which year it was.  I guess they thought it would impress people who were looking to buy a truck.  Imo, it was a big mistake to expose it as anyone who wanted a truck would look at it and think...this isn't a truck, it's just a Pilot with the back cut off.

That "frame" is a minor structure supporting the unibody chassis, and dig deep enough and one will likely find the Ridgeline chassis at least as strong, and much stiffer, than the chassis of other less-than-full-size trucks; Tacoma, Frontier, Colorado, etc., as unibody is inherently superior to BoF.

[FoMoJo]

That "frame" is a minor structure supporting the unibody chassis, and dig deep enough and one will likely find the Ridgeline chassis at least as strong, and much stiffer, than the chassis of other less-than-full-size trucks; Tacoma, Frontier, Colorado, etc., as unibody is inherently superior to BoF.

Not for a real truck.

Honda is my 2nd favourite major auto manufacturer.  I admire their history, their racing programmes and their cars.  Usually, when they build a product, it ranks very high for innovation and out and out performance.  Not so with the Ridgeline.  It just seemed like an idea from the marketing department that the engineers had no interest in.

[68_427]

This is a real Ridgeline.

[GoCougs]

Not for a real truck.

Honda is my 2nd favourite major auto manufacturer.  I admire their history, their racing programmes and their cars.  Usually, when they build a product, it ranks very high for innovation and out and out performance.  Not so with the Ridgeline.  It just seemed like an idea from the marketing department that the engineers had no interest in.

"Real" trucks are antiquated beasties - leaf springs, BoF, live axles, etc. These old technologies stick around because the truck segment is much less competitive than the passenger car segment.

[CJ]

It's proven extremely durable, so why change?  When buying a truck for truck reasons, durability sits pretty high up on the list of priorities. 

[FoMoJo]

"Real" trucks are antiquated beasties - leaf springs, BoF, live axles, etc. These old technologies stick around because the truck segment is much less competitive than the passenger car segment.

I'm sure the manufacturers could spend truckloads of money introducing innovative technologies on trucks to replace leaf springs, live axles, etc. with something considered more modern; and be just as tough and reliable in a work environment.  However, why would someone want to pay the extra money it would cost for modern technologies that do the same job as what has always worked well? 

It's interesting that the new Explorer has been 'modernized' and it even was chosen as 'Truck' of the year at the Detroit auto show.  However, the truckish aspects have been reduced as it was determined that 99.9% of people buying them do not use them as 'work' trucks; because they really aren't trucks.  Same with the Ridgeline.

[GoCougs]

This is a real Ridgeline.

But still drives and handles like a truck, is no quicker, and has virtually the same payload capacity. The only real advantage is higher towing and off road prowess, which is wasted capacity on this segment for most buyers.

[GoCougs]

It's proven extremely durable, so why change?  When buying a truck for truck reasons, durability sits pretty high up on the list of priorities.  

I'm sure the manufacturers could spend truckloads of money introducing innovative technologies on trucks to replace leaf springs, live axles, etc. with something considered more modern; and be just as tough and reliable in a work environment.  However, why would someone want to pay the extra money it would cost for modern technologies that do the same job as what has always worked well? 

Cars once upon a time were BoF and had leaf springs and live axles too. Why did they change? Competition forced change to superior technologies which aren't any less durable or expensive.

[FoMoJo]

Cars once upon a time were BoF and had leaf springs and live axles too. Why did they change? Competition forced change to superior technologies which aren't any less durable or expensive.

Are you suggesting that trucks have not changed?

[Atomic]

the honda ridgeline is a super nice vehicle... a decent "package" that plays a vital role - keeping honda and acura owners loyal to the brand by proving a wide array of choices under one roof. otherwise, customers might switch brands while shopping for their trucks at the toyota dealer across the street from the honda-acura dealership.

[93JC]

the honda ridgeline is a super nice vehicle... a decent "package" that plays a vital role - keeping honda and acura owners loyal to the brand by proving a wide array of choices under one roof. otherwise, customers might switch brands while shopping for their trucks at the toyota dealer across the street from the honda-acura dealership.

Sales suggest they already do shop across the street so to speak.

[Rupert]

This is a real Ridgeline.

This is a real Avalanche.

[giant_mtb]

[Byteme]

But still drives and handles like a truck, is no quicker, and has virtually the same payload capacity. The only real advantage is higher towing and off road prowess, which is wasted capacity on this segment for most buyers.

Could just be a local anomoly but I see a heck of a lot more Avalanches than Ridgelines towing something.  In fact I don't think I've ever seen a Ridgeline towing anything.   

Off road capability? From what I've read the Ridgeline has little but it hardly matters anyway since most buyers, with the possible exception of Jeep buyers, don't really use whatever off road capability their vehicles have anyway.   

[Byteme]

"Real" trucks are antiquated beasties - leaf springs, BoF, live axles, etc. These old technologies stick around because the truck segment is much less competitive than the passenger car segment.

Far from being less competitive, the manufacturer's truck segnments are highly competitive.  Truck divisions have been cash cows for auto companies for years.  They are not about to let a competitor get ahead and steal sales with the introduction of different and better technology.   They are using what they do now because it works best in that application.


If I recall correctly Chevy trucks from the early 60's to the early 70's used a coil spring rear suspensions.  That layout was abandoned in favour of leaf springs in the rear.  Why?  Because leafs work better in that application. 


Besides leaf springs body on frame is desirable because commercial buyers frequently replace the standard bed with a custom rig suited to their purposes.  Also a damaged bed can be easily replaced at far less cost than replacing the vehicle.  And a damaged bed doesn't compromise the integrity of the entire vehicle.  Unibody is great for many applications, but not this one.

Live axles?  Less complicated, less cost and again, they work better in a vehicle that is called upon to haul loads. 

[Byteme]

Cars once upon a time were BoF and had leaf springs and live axles too. Why did they change? Competition forced change to superior technologies which aren't any less durable or expensive.

Superior for the intended use.  Cars and trucks are designed for different missions.

[Raza]

But it rides and handles far better than any compact/mid-size truck plus it has the same payload capability as the Tacoma and Frontier and has a tow rating of 5,000 lbs (Tacoma and Frontier are ~6,500 lbs).

We have to admit that the majority of new truck buyers never exceed Ridgeline towing, hauling and off-road capabilities, and IMO why Honda is sticking with it.

100% right.  Most people drive trucks on road, use them as daily drivers; the most taxing thing most Americans do in pickups is a trip to Home Depot. 

[GoCougs]

Far from being less competitive, the manufacturer's truck segnments are highly competitive.  Truck divisions have been cash cows for auto companies for years.  They are not about to let a competitor get ahead and steal sales with the introduction of different and better technology.   They are using what they do now because it works best in that application.

"Big profits" = less competition = less competitive by definition. Until about 10 years ago there were only three trucks for decades in the US market. Still there are only five.

If I recall correctly Chevy trucks from the early 60's to the early 70's used a coil spring rear suspensions.  That layout was abandoned in favour of leaf springs in the rear.  Why?  Because leafs work better in that application. 

Leaf are/were used because they are cheaper. Ram now uses springs (1/2-tons) and all 1/2-ton derived SUVs (Tahoe/Suburban, Expedition, Sequoia, Armada, etc.) all use coil springs. Why? That segment is much more competitive and coils are a superior technology.

Besides leaf springs body on frame is desirable because commercial buyers frequently replace the standard bed with a custom rig suited to their purposes.  Also a damaged bed can be easily replaced at far less cost than replacing the vehicle.  And a damaged bed doesn't compromise the integrity of the entire vehicle.  Unibody is great for many applications, but not this one.

Good point about commercial buyers but the vast majority of 1/2-ton trucks are sold retail; Chevy had (still has?) the W/T series which was a stripped down truck with vinyl seats, AM/FM radio only, single headlights, etc., specifically for commercial buyers.

A Ridgeline bed, and/or portions of it, can be replaced. Automakers never make a car to be more easily fixed or repairable.

Live axles?  Less complicated, less cost and again, they work better in a vehicle that is called upon to haul loads. 

See 1/2-ton SUV and Ram blurb above.

[GoCougs]

Superior for the intended use.  Cars and trucks are designed for different missions.

Because that was older technology. The passenger vehicle segment is infinitely more competitive, ergo, far more advanced technologies employed.

[Northlands]

I wonder just how many Ridgelines would sell if Honda had an all wheel drive version of the Odyssey ( with a towing package. )

[Xer0]

I wonder just how many Ridgelines would sell if Honda had an all wheel drive version of the Odyssey ( with a towing package. )

I doubt it.  Most Americans just don't see minivans like that.