I know most don't like the exterior styling of the ridgeline, myself included.
Up to this point i've been having a hard time putting my dislike for it into words.
Until i came here to this forum and i saw what looked like a smilie specifically designed for the ridgeline. Personally i think it sums up my feelings perfectly.
Here it is:
(http://forums.carspin.net/style_images/X-039/icon8.gif)
I deffinitely agree. I actually saw one in person today at the local Wal-Mart...man it's ugly. It is disproportional and looks like it's trying to be more than one vehicle at a time. From the side it looks like it's posing as an Avalanche or Escalade...and from the front/back...I really don't know what to tell ya...but it's ugly...and it's a Honda. "Above all, it's a Honda"...yeah...the Honda part is the worst part! :P
I don't know, I was behind one on the road and well it didn't look bad, but then again, it's a truck so I guess it is ugly then.
It is most definitely a little quirky. The proportions just don't look right. Glad to know it isn't just me.
Haha. Yeah I almost fell out of my chair when I saw the "And most of all, it's a Honda."
Sort of reminds me of the Simpsons episode where Superintendant Chalmers gets mad at Principal Skinner when someone steals the "H" off his Honda Accord. "Now nobody will know it's a Honda! What's the point of owning a Honda if you can't show it off?!?"
Yeah, it's way overboard. I think Honda is overcompensating for their weenie image with the Ridgeline's design.
It is no worse than an Avalanche or Hummer tho'.
I saw one in black that looked decent. The darker colors look much better but ugly is still ugly.
QuoteYeah, it's way overboard. I think Honda is overcompensating for their weenie image with the Ridgeline's design.
It is no worse than an Avalanche or Hummer tho'.
A Hummer actually has off-road capability though. It doesn't exist primarily for off-roaders, but it's not only at home on pavement like the Ridgeline.
The Ridgeline is ugly, overpriced, and impractical. That is all I have to say on the subject. :praise:
I haven't seen one in person yet. I am driving past a Honda dealer today, and I hope to catch a glimpse of one.
But the pictures sure don't flatter it.
QuoteThe Ridgeline is ugly, overpriced, and impractical. That is all I have to say on the subject. :praise:
One of those is subjective, the other two are somewhat inaccurate. ;)
I think the Ridgeline looks better than the Avalanche, but I'd probably take the Chevy myself. With the folddown bulkhead the Avalanche's bed comes out to what like 8' or something, as oppossed to the Ridgeline which is only about 5'.
The gas mileages of the two vehicles is roughly the same, after incentives the Avalanche is only about $3000 more than the Ridgeline, and it starts with about 1 ton extra towing capacity.
I saw one at the supermarket a couple of weeks ago. Definately not a pretty vehicle. I think the only good angle is to look at it directly head on. Beyond that it just looks weird.
QuoteQuoteThe Ridgeline is ugly, overpriced, and impractical. That is all I have to say on the subject. :praise:
One of those is subjective, the other two are somewhat inaccurate. ;)
What, you think the Ridgeline is attractive?
It may be subjective, but I have yet to find somebody who thinks the Ridgeline is anything but awkward.
QuoteQuoteQuoteThe Ridgeline is ugly, overpriced, and impractical. That is all I have to say on the subject. :praise:
One of those is subjective, the other two are somewhat inaccurate. ;)
What, you think the Ridgeline is attractive?
It may be subjective, but I have yet to find somebody who thinks the Ridgeline is anything but awkward.
I don't hate the front end, but awkward best describes everything further rearward than the cab.
QuoteQuoteThe Ridgeline is ugly, overpriced, and impractical. That is all I have to say on the subject. :praise:
One of those is subjective, the other two are somewhat inaccurate. ;)
There is no debate about that the Ridgeline is overpriced, to say otherwise is futile. Even a Tundra DoubleCab 4x4 can be had for less. And, the Ridgeline is less practical than pretty much all of the other trucks in this segment except for the Colorado (payload doesn't matter nearly as much as towing capacity when the beds are that small). But, do we really want to start another dead end argument?
QuoteQuoteQuoteThe Ridgeline is ugly, overpriced, and impractical. That is all I have to say on the subject. :praise:
One of those is subjective, the other two are somewhat inaccurate. ;)
There is no debate about that the Ridgeline is overpriced, to say otherwise is futile. Even a Tundra DoubleCab 4x4 can be had for less. And, the Ridgeline is less practical than pretty much all of the other trucks in this segment except for the Colorado (payload doesn't matter nearly as much as towing capacity when the beds are that small). But, do we really want to start another dead end argument?
Overpriced? Not really, especially compared to the Tacoma. Less practical? Not really, the bed is typically long among midsize pickups, and a 5K towing capacity not only outdoes the Colorado and the V6 Dakota, but it's enough even for most pickup buyers.
QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteThe Ridgeline is ugly, overpriced, and impractical. That is all I have to say on the subject. :praise:
One of those is subjective, the other two are somewhat inaccurate. ;)
There is no debate about that the Ridgeline is overpriced, to say otherwise is futile. Even a Tundra DoubleCab 4x4 can be had for less. And, the Ridgeline is less practical than pretty much all of the other trucks in this segment except for the Colorado (payload doesn't matter nearly as much as towing capacity when the beds are that small). But, do we really want to start another dead end argument?
Overpriced? Not really, especially compared to the Tacoma. Less practical? Not really, the bed is typically long among midsize pickups, and a 5K towing capacity not only outdoes the Colorado and the V6 Dakota, but it's enough even for most pickup buyers.
I can't recall all of the numbers but I do remember that there was a significant difference between the Tacoma and Ridgeline. Also, what if you don't need 4wd (and, in reality chances are if you need 4wd the Ridgeline's system probably won't be good enough)? That is another $1000 or so. Or, maybe you want a manual? That is about $800. The Ridgeline is overpriced, there is no way around it. But, to a certain extent so is the Tacoma. As far as practicality goes, what if you want to go beyond that muddy dirt road and actually do some real offroading? The Ridgeline definitely wouldn't work very well for that. And, the 5,000 lb towing limit isn't my concern so much as how well it will handle that 5,000 lbs. I think that if you do much medium duty towing like that you could be looking at some major problems.
QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteThe Ridgeline is ugly, overpriced, and impractical. That is all I have to say on the subject. :praise:
One of those is subjective, the other two are somewhat inaccurate. ;)
There is no debate about that the Ridgeline is overpriced, to say otherwise is futile. Even a Tundra DoubleCab 4x4 can be had for less. And, the Ridgeline is less practical than pretty much all of the other trucks in this segment except for the Colorado (payload doesn't matter nearly as much as towing capacity when the beds are that small). But, do we really want to start another dead end argument?
Overpriced? Not really, especially compared to the Tacoma. Less practical? Not really, the bed is typically long among midsize pickups, and a 5K towing capacity not only outdoes the Colorado and the V6 Dakota, but it's enough even for most pickup buyers.
I can't recall all of the numbers but I do remember that there was a significant difference between the Tacoma and Ridgeline. Also, what if you don't need 4wd (and, in reality chances are if you need 4wd the Ridgeline's system probably won't be good enough)? That is another $1000 or so. Or, maybe you want a manual? That is about $800. The Ridgeline is overpriced, there is no way around it. But, to a certain extent so is the Tacoma. As far as practicality goes, what if you want to go beyond that muddy dirt road and actually do some real offroading? The Ridgeline definitely wouldn't work very well for that. And, the 5,000 lb towing limit isn't my concern so much as how well it will handle that 5,000 lbs. I think that if you do much medium duty towing like that you could be looking at some major problems.
I recall a mag or online review where they compared a Ridgeline towing a 5K-lb trailer to an F-150 5.4 towing a 5K-lb trailer, and the reviewer came away impressed with the Ridgeline's ability.
Also, no one's arguing that the Ridgeline is good for off-roaders (aside from a few devoted Honda trolls back on C/D), quite the opposite.
And the Tacoma isn't less than a comparably-equipped Ridgeline, it's actually more unless prices have changed since I set up my comparo (which I still think you ought to read, it shouldn't take you more than 15 minutes).
QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteThe Ridgeline is ugly, overpriced, and impractical. That is all I have to say on the subject.? :praise:
One of those is subjective, the other two are somewhat inaccurate. ;)
There is no debate about that the Ridgeline is overpriced, to say otherwise is futile. Even a Tundra DoubleCab 4x4 can be had for less. And, the Ridgeline is less practical than pretty much all of the other trucks in this segment except for the Colorado (payload doesn't matter nearly as much as towing capacity when the beds are that small). But, do we really want to start another dead end argument?
Overpriced? Not really, especially compared to the Tacoma. Less practical? Not really, the bed is typically long among midsize pickups, and a 5K towing capacity not only outdoes the Colorado and the V6 Dakota, but it's enough even for most pickup buyers.
I can't recall all of the numbers but I do remember that there was a significant difference between the Tacoma and Ridgeline. Also, what if you don't need 4wd (and, in reality chances are if you need 4wd the Ridgeline's system probably won't be good enough)? That is another $1000 or so. Or, maybe you want a manual? That is about $800. The Ridgeline is overpriced, there is no way around it. But, to a certain extent so is the Tacoma. As far as practicality goes, what if you want to go beyond that muddy dirt road and actually do some real offroading? The Ridgeline definitely wouldn't work very well for that. And, the 5,000 lb towing limit isn't my concern so much as how well it will handle that 5,000 lbs. I think that if you do much medium duty towing like that you could be looking at some major problems.
I recall a mag or online review where they compared a Ridgeline towing a 5K-lb trailer to an F-150 5.4 towing a 5K-lb trailer, and the reviewer came away impressed with the Ridgeline's ability.
Also, no one's arguing that the Ridgeline is good for off-roaders (aside from a few devoted Honda trolls back on C/D), quite the opposite.
And the Tacoma isn't less than a comparably-equipped Ridgeline, it's actually more unless prices have changed since I set up my comparo (which I still think you ought to read, it shouldn't take you more than 15 minutes).
That was Motor Trend I believe. They dragged raced a Ridgeline and F-150 with the same loads and the Ridgeline was only slightly slower. Pretty impressive.
QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteThe Ridgeline is ugly, overpriced, and impractical. That is all I have to say on the subject. :praise:
One of those is subjective, the other two are somewhat inaccurate. ;)
There is no debate about that the Ridgeline is overpriced, to say otherwise is futile. Even a Tundra DoubleCab 4x4 can be had for less. And, the Ridgeline is less practical than pretty much all of the other trucks in this segment except for the Colorado (payload doesn't matter nearly as much as towing capacity when the beds are that small). But, do we really want to start another dead end argument?
Overpriced? Not really, especially compared to the Tacoma. Less practical? Not really, the bed is typically long among midsize pickups, and a 5K towing capacity not only outdoes the Colorado and the V6 Dakota, but it's enough even for most pickup buyers.
I can't recall all of the numbers but I do remember that there was a significant difference between the Tacoma and Ridgeline. Also, what if you don't need 4wd (and, in reality chances are if you need 4wd the Ridgeline's system probably won't be good enough)? That is another $1000 or so. Or, maybe you want a manual? That is about $800. The Ridgeline is overpriced, there is no way around it. But, to a certain extent so is the Tacoma. As far as practicality goes, what if you want to go beyond that muddy dirt road and actually do some real offroading? The Ridgeline definitely wouldn't work very well for that. And, the 5,000 lb towing limit isn't my concern so much as how well it will handle that 5,000 lbs. I think that if you do much medium duty towing like that you could be looking at some major problems.
I recall a mag or online review where they compared a Ridgeline towing a 5K-lb trailer to an F-150 5.4 towing a 5K-lb trailer, and the reviewer came away impressed with the Ridgeline's ability.
Also, no one's arguing that the Ridgeline is good for off-roaders (aside from a few devoted Honda trolls back on C/D), quite the opposite.
And the Tacoma isn't less than a comparably-equipped Ridgeline, it's actually more unless prices have changed since I set up my comparo (which I still think you ought to read, it shouldn't take you more than 15 minutes).
Sorry but I have a hard time believing a Tacoma is more expensive than a comparably equipped Tundra. You can look the numbers up again and post them if you want, but I for one I am too lazy.
And, of course the Ridgeline is going to drive better while towing than the F-150 just because by design it is a better driving vehicle. But, by design it should also be a lot less durable and that is what I am talking about. How will a Ridgeline hold up in the long run if asked to tow a 5000 lb trailer every couple of months?
QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteThe Ridgeline is ugly, overpriced, and impractical. That is all I have to say on the subject. :praise:
One of those is subjective, the other two are somewhat inaccurate. ;)
There is no debate about that the Ridgeline is overpriced, to say otherwise is futile. Even a Tundra DoubleCab 4x4 can be had for less. And, the Ridgeline is less practical than pretty much all of the other trucks in this segment except for the Colorado (payload doesn't matter nearly as much as towing capacity when the beds are that small). But, do we really want to start another dead end argument?
Overpriced? Not really, especially compared to the Tacoma. Less practical? Not really, the bed is typically long among midsize pickups, and a 5K towing capacity not only outdoes the Colorado and the V6 Dakota, but it's enough even for most pickup buyers.
I can't recall all of the numbers but I do remember that there was a significant difference between the Tacoma and Ridgeline. Also, what if you don't need 4wd (and, in reality chances are if you need 4wd the Ridgeline's system probably won't be good enough)? That is another $1000 or so. Or, maybe you want a manual? That is about $800. The Ridgeline is overpriced, there is no way around it. But, to a certain extent so is the Tacoma. As far as practicality goes, what if you want to go beyond that muddy dirt road and actually do some real offroading? The Ridgeline definitely wouldn't work very well for that. And, the 5,000 lb towing limit isn't my concern so much as how well it will handle that 5,000 lbs. I think that if you do much medium duty towing like that you could be looking at some major problems.
I recall a mag or online review where they compared a Ridgeline towing a 5K-lb trailer to an F-150 5.4 towing a 5K-lb trailer, and the reviewer came away impressed with the Ridgeline's ability.
Also, no one's arguing that the Ridgeline is good for off-roaders (aside from a few devoted Honda trolls back on C/D), quite the opposite.
And the Tacoma isn't less than a comparably-equipped Ridgeline, it's actually more unless prices have changed since I set up my comparo (which I still think you ought to read, it shouldn't take you more than 15 minutes).
Sorry but I have a hard time believing a Tacoma is more expensive than a comparably equipped Tundra. You can look the numbers up again and post them if you want, but I for one I am too lazy.
And, of course the Ridgeline is going to drive better while towing than the F-150 just because by design it is a better driving vehicle. But, by design it should also be a lot less durable and that is what I am talking about. How will a Ridgeline hold up in the long run if asked to tow a 5000 lb trailer every couple of months?
I don't know, and neither do you.
But the people who will be towing that large of a trailer aren't likely to be interested in the Ridgeline anyway, many owners probably will never even get a trailer hitch reciever (many truck-based SUVs and pickups owners don't either).
No one's arguing that it's the best vehicle for heavy-duty work, as it's not. It's a pickup that can act like a car in standard driving, yet can, when it has to, carry 1,500 lbs or tow 5,000, which should fit the needs of many pickup buyers, especially urban ones.
QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteThe Ridgeline is ugly, overpriced, and impractical. That is all I have to say on the subject. :praise:
One of those is subjective, the other two are somewhat inaccurate. ;)
There is no debate about that the Ridgeline is overpriced, to say otherwise is futile. Even a Tundra DoubleCab 4x4 can be had for less. And, the Ridgeline is less practical than pretty much all of the other trucks in this segment except for the Colorado (payload doesn't matter nearly as much as towing capacity when the beds are that small). But, do we really want to start another dead end argument?
Overpriced? Not really, especially compared to the Tacoma. Less practical? Not really, the bed is typically long among midsize pickups, and a 5K towing capacity not only outdoes the Colorado and the V6 Dakota, but it's enough even for most pickup buyers.
I can't recall all of the numbers but I do remember that there was a significant difference between the Tacoma and Ridgeline. Also, what if you don't need 4wd (and, in reality chances are if you need 4wd the Ridgeline's system probably won't be good enough)? That is another $1000 or so. Or, maybe you want a manual? That is about $800. The Ridgeline is overpriced, there is no way around it. But, to a certain extent so is the Tacoma. As far as practicality goes, what if you want to go beyond that muddy dirt road and actually do some real offroading? The Ridgeline definitely wouldn't work very well for that. And, the 5,000 lb towing limit isn't my concern so much as how well it will handle that 5,000 lbs. I think that if you do much medium duty towing like that you could be looking at some major problems.
I recall a mag or online review where they compared a Ridgeline towing a 5K-lb trailer to an F-150 5.4 towing a 5K-lb trailer, and the reviewer came away impressed with the Ridgeline's ability.
Also, no one's arguing that the Ridgeline is good for off-roaders (aside from a few devoted Honda trolls back on C/D), quite the opposite.
And the Tacoma isn't less than a comparably-equipped Ridgeline, it's actually more unless prices have changed since I set up my comparo (which I still think you ought to read, it shouldn't take you more than 15 minutes).
Sorry but I have a hard time believing a Tacoma is more expensive than a comparably equipped Tundra. You can look the numbers up again and post them if you want, but I for one I am too lazy.
And, of course the Ridgeline is going to drive better while towing than the F-150 just because by design it is a better driving vehicle. But, by design it should also be a lot less durable and that is what I am talking about. How will a Ridgeline hold up in the long run if asked to tow a 5000 lb trailer every couple of months?
I don't know, and neither do you.
But the people who will be towing that large of a trailer aren't likely to be interested in the Ridgeline anyway, many owners probably will never even get a trailer hitch reciever (many truck-based SUVs and pickups owners don't either).
No one's arguing that it's the best vehicle for heavy-duty work, as it's not. It's a pickup that can act like a car in standard driving, yet can, when it has to, carry 1,500 lbs or tow 5,000, which should fit the needs of many pickup buyers, especially urban ones.
Does the Ridgeline really drive well enough to make it worth sacrificing the ability to tow 5000+ lbs if the need arises?
QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteThe Ridgeline is ugly, overpriced, and impractical. That is all I have to say on the subject. :praise:
One of those is subjective, the other two are somewhat inaccurate. ;)
There is no debate about that the Ridgeline is overpriced, to say otherwise is futile. Even a Tundra DoubleCab 4x4 can be had for less. And, the Ridgeline is less practical than pretty much all of the other trucks in this segment except for the Colorado (payload doesn't matter nearly as much as towing capacity when the beds are that small). But, do we really want to start another dead end argument?
Overpriced? Not really, especially compared to the Tacoma. Less practical? Not really, the bed is typically long among midsize pickups, and a 5K towing capacity not only outdoes the Colorado and the V6 Dakota, but it's enough even for most pickup buyers.
I can't recall all of the numbers but I do remember that there was a significant difference between the Tacoma and Ridgeline. Also, what if you don't need 4wd (and, in reality chances are if you need 4wd the Ridgeline's system probably won't be good enough)? That is another $1000 or so. Or, maybe you want a manual? That is about $800. The Ridgeline is overpriced, there is no way around it. But, to a certain extent so is the Tacoma. As far as practicality goes, what if you want to go beyond that muddy dirt road and actually do some real offroading? The Ridgeline definitely wouldn't work very well for that. And, the 5,000 lb towing limit isn't my concern so much as how well it will handle that 5,000 lbs. I think that if you do much medium duty towing like that you could be looking at some major problems.
I recall a mag or online review where they compared a Ridgeline towing a 5K-lb trailer to an F-150 5.4 towing a 5K-lb trailer, and the reviewer came away impressed with the Ridgeline's ability.
Also, no one's arguing that the Ridgeline is good for off-roaders (aside from a few devoted Honda trolls back on C/D), quite the opposite.
And the Tacoma isn't less than a comparably-equipped Ridgeline, it's actually more unless prices have changed since I set up my comparo (which I still think you ought to read, it shouldn't take you more than 15 minutes).
Sorry but I have a hard time believing a Tacoma is more expensive than a comparably equipped Tundra. You can look the numbers up again and post them if you want, but I for one I am too lazy.
And, of course the Ridgeline is going to drive better while towing than the F-150 just because by design it is a better driving vehicle. But, by design it should also be a lot less durable and that is what I am talking about. How will a Ridgeline hold up in the long run if asked to tow a 5000 lb trailer every couple of months?
I don't know, and neither do you.
But the people who will be towing that large of a trailer aren't likely to be interested in the Ridgeline anyway, many owners probably will never even get a trailer hitch reciever (many truck-based SUVs and pickups owners don't either).
No one's arguing that it's the best vehicle for heavy-duty work, as it's not. It's a pickup that can act like a car in standard driving, yet can, when it has to, carry 1,500 lbs or tow 5,000, which should fit the needs of many pickup buyers, especially urban ones.
Does the Ridgeline really drive well enough to make it worth sacrificing the ability to tow 5000+ lbs if the need arises?
People who need to tow more have an abundance of choices, but there's only one midsize pickup with the Ridgeline's levels of comfort, refinement, and interior space.
But thats its greatest flaw too.IMO most of the fullsize models offer equal to or better comfort,refinement,and interior space for equal or less money!
Plus its butt ugly and gets poor MPG considering its power/capabilty shortcomings.
I actually saw my second Ridgeline on the road last night.My personal Jury is still out on which looks worse between Ridgeline and a Suburu Baja.
QuoteMy personal Jury is still out on which looks worse between Ridgeline and a Suburu Baja.
I vote Ridgeline, but I've still only seen one - maybe it will grow on me.
I also do think it's overpriced for what you get, at least for me, but I suppose it's a good deal for those interested in a non-truck truck.
I still recall that one and only Baja I saw on the road .Prob because it was only about a month ago..(pretty sad for somthing thats been out 2? years!)
I didnt think they looked THAT BAD in photos,but in person? DAMN! :o
It was two tone black with silver on the bottom.
The proportions were all out of whack on it.
I dont think the Ridgeline is as bad actually.But ugly is ugly! :P
http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/050509/lam059.html?.v=7 (http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/050509/lam059.html?.v=7)
2006 Honda Ridgeline is First Ever Four-Door Truck to Earn Top Government Crash Test Rating
Monday May 9, 12:02 pm ET
TORRANCE, Calif., May 9 /PRNewswire/ -- The 2006 Honda Ridgeline has earned a 5-Star safety rating for both frontal and side impact crash test performance from the National Highway Transportation Safety Administration (NHTSA), American Honda Motor Co., announced today. The Ridgeline, Honda's first truck, is the first ever 4-door pickup to earn the government's highest crash test safety rating.
Honda has six vehicles -- more than any other vehicle brand -- that achieve a top rating for both frontal and side impacts under the federal government's NCAP (New Car Assessment Program) program. They are the Honda Ridgeline, Odyssey, Element, Civic Coupe with front side air bags, CR-V and Pilot.
"Consumers don't want to sacrifice safety for performance, functionality or fuel efficiency," said John Mendel, senior vice president of American Honda. "The Ridgeline's unique design allows us to deliver on all fronts with great safety, class leading fuel economy and tremendous truck capability along with a fun-to-drive element unmatched in the pickup truck segment."
Completely new for the 2006 model year, the Ridgeline's integrated full- frame body structure is designed to help protect its occupants while reducing the effect of crash energy on opposing vehicles for improved compatibility with smaller vehicles. The Ridgeline, like most Honda vehicles sold today, is also equipped with an array of pedestrian safety features such as breakaway windshield wiper pivots; and energy-absorbing hood structure and hinges.
In keeping with Honda's industry-leading "Safety for Everyone" initiative, all Ridgeline model come equipped with a comprehensive list of advanced safety features including dual-stage, dual-threshold front airbags; Vehicle Stability Assist (VSA) with Traction Control; side curtain airbags with rollover sensor; driver's and front passenger's side airbags (passenger side airbag with Occupant Position Detection System (OPDS) to prevent airbag deployment when a child or small stature adult is in the deployment path); anti-lock brakes; and electronic brake assist.
QuoteDoes the Ridgeline really drive well enough to make it worth sacrificing the ability to tow 5000+ lbs if the need arises?
So few people tow more than 5,000 lbs that it is really a non-issue. In fact, only 40% of F150 owners tow AT ALL.
If you don't tow (most don't) and you don't go off road (most don't), why would you want to exclude the Ridgeline from consideration? (aside from appearance)
Quote2006 Honda Ridgeline is First Ever Four-Door Truck to Earn Top Government Crash Test Rating
Monday May 9, 12:02 pm ET
That's all well and good, but in the real world I'd take a wel-designed traditional truck over a Ridgeline if it was safety that I was worried about.
But hey, if I lived in an area where concrete barriers commonly jumped out in front of cars, I'd take the Ridgeline.
Personally, I think the overall concept of the Ridgeline is fine. I could definately see it being a pretty good vehicle for weekend camping trips, etc. However, I think Honda went a little too far trying to be different with the styling. I'm not sure alot of pick-up buyers want styling that's out in left field. Had Honda stuck with a conservative front like the Pilot and designed the bed a little differently I think I would have liked it a little more. Like I've said before, I don't hate the thing but it's annoying how Honda is trying to convince everyone that it's something its not. And, I'm not convinced it need a V8. If it gets the same mileage as a V8 than, yeah, maybe it does, but if it is somewhat efficient I think it has enough power to get the job done..
Pretty funny article! "Class leading MPG"? This Honda rep is being "selective" on which class of truck benefits them the most in yet another argument.
21 HWY isnt class leading for the compacts as Frontier/tacoma do that and Colorado is rated at 24-25.
So it gets a few MPG better than the Fullsizers...at a cost in other areas!
Quotehttp://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/050509/lam059.html?.v=7 (http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/050509/lam059.html?.v=7)
2006 Honda Ridgeline is First Ever Four-Door Truck to Earn Top Government Crash Test Rating
Monday May 9, 12:02 pm ET
TORRANCE, Calif., May 9 /PRNewswire/ -- The 2006 Honda Ridgeline has earned a 5-Star safety rating for both frontal and side impact crash test performance from the National Highway Transportation Safety Administration (NHTSA), American Honda Motor Co., announced today. The Ridgeline, Honda's first truck, is the first ever 4-door pickup to earn the government's highest crash test safety rating.
Honda has six vehicles -- more than any other vehicle brand -- that achieve a top rating for both frontal and side impacts under the federal government's NCAP (New Car Assessment Program) program. They are the Honda Ridgeline, Odyssey, Element, Civic Coupe with front side air bags, CR-V and Pilot.
"Consumers don't want to sacrifice safety for performance, functionality or fuel efficiency," said John Mendel, senior vice president of American Honda. "The Ridgeline's unique design allows us to deliver on all fronts with great safety, class leading fuel economy and tremendous truck capability along with a fun-to-drive element unmatched in the pickup truck segment."
Completely new for the 2006 model year, the Ridgeline's integrated full- frame body structure is designed to help protect its occupants while reducing the effect of crash energy on opposing vehicles for improved compatibility with smaller vehicles. The Ridgeline, like most Honda vehicles sold today, is also equipped with an array of pedestrian safety features such as breakaway windshield wiper pivots; and energy-absorbing hood structure and hinges.
In keeping with Honda's industry-leading "Safety for Everyone" initiative, all Ridgeline model come equipped with a comprehensive list of advanced safety features including dual-stage, dual-threshold front airbags; Vehicle Stability Assist (VSA) with Traction Control; side curtain airbags with rollover sensor; driver's and front passenger's side airbags (passenger side airbag with Occupant Position Detection System (OPDS) to prevent airbag deployment when a child or small stature adult is in the deployment path); anti-lock brakes; and electronic brake assist.
:D :D :D
The Ridgeline is one of only two or three four-door pickups to be given the front and side crash test. No surprise it was "the first" to get the highest ratings in both the frontal and side crash test, most pickups are only given the frontal test (the only other crew cabs given the side test have been the smaller Colorado and Frontier).
Nice spin, Honda.
Give it a normal grille and make the sides of the bed leveled and shorter and it should be better. and those ugly handles....
I don't think its too bad even though it's... weird.
I saw another one today. This one was like burnt red or brown or something...absolutely sick. Although it does look better in dark colors than light colors, IMO. It was still ridiculously ugly and disproportional...but oh well. lol ^_^
To me the silliest thing about the Ridgeline is it's name which cracks me up. Sort of like Toyota's "Tundra". What's next, "Permafrost"? I think they're running out of names down at Honda and Toyota.
Names aside, I think the Honda is a nice although somewhat ugly multipurpose vehicle. I wouldn't call it a car and I sure wouldn't call it a truck but I think it's a good all-purpose rig for the person that either can't afford or doesn't need two seperate vehicles, a car and a truck. The Ridgeline will haul the family and still be able to perforn those light hauling jobs that most people need to do from time to time like runs to the Home Depot for mulch, etc.
When it comes to towing there's more to tow ratings than just the weight of the trailer. There's wind resistance and altitude considerations to factor in. From what I've seen of the Ridgeline I wouldn't expect it to tow much more than a loaded enclosed U-Haul trailer in a stiff headwind or over a western mountain pass. I sure wouldn't want to be towing a 5000 pound travel trailer with it under those condiditons.
For those of us that don't want our trucks to be "more car like" there are plenty of alternatives. You can buy a pretty nice Ford Powerstroke or Dodge Cummins for the price of a Ridgeline and that's where I'd put my dough.
I went to the Honda dealership the other day, and the interior of a Ridgeline is very usable. Everything is layed out nicely, it's all easy to reach, and although the mirror is really high (tall roof, durrh) you can see quite a bit through it. And the rear seat room is more than I expected, and the seats are very comfortable for short term trips. I'd say I can last about 5 -7 hours in them. The leather is also really nice.
Now speaking in terms of someone who tows a lot, I can't drive. So booyah.