Comparisons

[Ridgeline4wd_Archive]

I didn't have to cross my fingers and hope, I knew the champ before it opened.
http://ifcar.net/reviews.comparisons.smallpickups.htm

[Ridgeline4wd_Archive]

Lame review, even if they picked the RL as #1 :evil:

"The new-for-2006 Ridgeline is the most carlike vehicle in this group. There's a good reason for that: the vehicle is largely based on Honda's Pilot SUV"

Wrong! Maybe they should learn to read or maybe do some actual research! The reality below.

"Contrary to speculation, the Honda Ridgeline is not a "Honda Pilot with a bed." Engineers started with Honda's Global Light Truck platform and transformed 93 percent of the components into a mission-specific platform with seven high strength steel cross members that create a fully boxed ladder frame structure with full integration into the unibody frame. Further differentiation includes unique suspension component designs, 100-percent unique sheetmetal and a 95-percent exclusive interior" - From Honda

"The Ridgeline has little to no off road ability beyond poorly-maintained unpaved roads, and can't tow as much as some vehicles in this group."

Wrong again, the RL has proven to perform quite well off road, in situations that 99% of drivers won't even experience. As for towing, others do have a bit more, but Honda does not fluff numbers, especially with the payload which is higher than the Tacoma anyway. Where did they get their numbers?!

"Interior quality is a low point, more than a few hard, cheap plastic trim pieces don't fit together well."

What? Where? The fit and finish like all Honda's blows away Toyota. The only thing that bothers me are the door handle grabs (the size and appearance). The interior of the RL is excellent.

I don't know why I get so bothered by this review, who the hell is IFCAR anyway. I just hate inaccurate reviews, especially of vehicles that I love!

D

[Ridgeline4wd_Archive]

I was a bit taken back by the face a trucker couldn't love comment.

[Ridgeline4wd_Archive]

Goodbye.

[Ridgeline4wd_Archive]

I think the comparison that the Ridge is the same as the Pilot started back when they first had the Odyssey. Then they came out with the MDX and advertised it as " Built on the Odyssey's platform " and everyone called the MDX an Odyssey. Well it had the same engine and some of the interior design was used for it too. Then the Pilot came out which has the same engine, same trannie, same drivetrain as the MDX just wrapped up different. So here comes the Ridgeline with the same engine, same trannie, same drivetrain, most of the same features as the other honda's so sure. Any Non Honda person would look at it like it was the same thing wrapped up different. We all know what it really is and we all can see the detail Honda put into it.

So this review is that guy's opinion, opinions are like A$$holes, everyones got one. BUT .. we did get a picture of the guy who did the review if it makes you feel better :lol:

Joe! 8)

[Ridgeline4wd_Archive]

I just have to add that I'm always telling people that the Ridgeline is almost exactly like my ex-MDX, and a good friend of mine is always correcting me telling everyone that it's nothing like the MDX, it's larger and built on a different platform...good friends are hard to find!

[Ridgeline4wd_Archive]

Meat,

You confused total payload vs. bed payload. The RL has a 1,100 lb payload, 1,550 lb total (passengers and cargo). So the total payload is higher on the Ridgeline (according to manufacturer figures). They are both 1/2 ton trucks. The Tacoma's payload is 1540 lbs. (double-cab, with auto tranny). The Taco can tow more though, 6500 lbs with the tow prep package.

Wrong is the perfect word for the Pilot platform argument. It may be based on the global truck platform, but the differences are huge. You seem to be confused by their wording, they started with the GLT platform, but ended with 93% different components. The Pilot does not have a fully boxed ladder frame, that alone sets them apart.

As for my "panties", they are just fine. I am a loyal Honda and Toyota owner and I defend both companies, not that they are perfect. I just get annyoyed with reviewers not getting the facts straight or doing sloppy/incomplete research. Even the new Car and Driver review has mistakes, here's the quote: "This first for Honda eschews pickup norms such as a ladder frame and solid-axle rear suspension for a carlike unibody chassis and independent rear suspension". HELLO! who edited this article, the RL has a freaking fully boxed ladder frame and a uni-body.

It's important, maybe not to you, but this is Honda's first truck, it was a big risk for them and I am going to do my small part to make sure the Ridgeline succeeds.

As for this: "To someone out there, the Yugo was the second coming.", sure and I have a name for those people, "MORONS"! :lol:

I know you really just love to argue and I am sure you will respond in kind, but reality is they were wrong and you are wrong. So get over it.

D

[Ridgeline4wd_Archive]

tedridge wrote (View Post): › docWrite("quote")I was a bit taken back by the face a trucker couldn't love comment.

Sure, the looks aren't for everyone, but they are different. I like how the RL sticks out in the Car and Driver article. It's different, not the same old, boring looking truck.

D

[Ridgeline4wd_Archive]

2006Ridgeline wrote (View Post): › docWrite("quote")I just have to add that I'm always telling people that the Ridgeline is almost exactly like my ex-MDX, and a good friend of mine is always correcting me telling everyone that it's nothing like the MDX, it's larger and built on a different platform...good friends are hard to find!

Exactly, we want you to brag about your Ridgeline, but it does not hurt to point out the features that make it unique!

D

[Ridgeline4wd_Archive]

good gravy... =\

we can discuss things without getting personal right? i assume anyone who can afford a 30+K automobile has some social restraint.

[Ridgeline4wd_Archive]

ridgeline4wd wrote (View Post): › docWrite("quote")good gravy... =\

we can discuss things without getting personal right? i assume anyone who can afford a 30+K automobile has some social restraint.

Sometimes I do!!! Sometimes I don't!! (social restraint) :shock:

Just my $.02 - to me it's okay to disagree on ideas and such. This forum should be like a bunch of people sitting around a campfire. We joke - we raze eachother - we even disagree. But we should know when to stop and not make direct attacks on the other person.

Forums are a GREAT place - but without the face-to-face it is sometimes really hard to tell where the other person is coming from.

[Ridgeline4wd_Archive]

Hello. Came across this thread on the MSN Search, and as the site admin for IFCAR and the author of this comparison test, I thought I'd better chime in.

EDIT: Please see my responses within the quote.

CBR600rr wrote (View Post): › docWrite("quote")Lame review, even if they picked the RL as #1 :evil:

"The new-for-2006 Ridgeline is the most carlike vehicle in this group. There's a good reason for that: the vehicle is largely based on Honda's Pilot SUV"

Wrong! Maybe they should learn to read or maybe do some actual research! The reality below.

"Contrary to speculation, the Honda Ridgeline is not a "Honda Pilot with a bed." Engineers started with Honda's Global Light Truck platform and transformed 93 percent of the components into a mission-specific platform with seven high strength steel cross members that create a fully boxed ladder frame structure with full integration into the unibody frame. Further differentiation includes unique suspension component designs, 100-percent unique sheetmetal and a 95-percent exclusive interior" - From Honda

What I meant there was not that the Ridgeline was simply a "Pilot with a bed." Quite the contrary, as Honda did an impressive job differentiating between the products. However, Honda did start with the same platform as the Pilot to build the vehicle, which is what I meant.

"The Ridgeline has little to no off road ability beyond poorly-maintained unpaved roads, and can't tow as much as some vehicles in this group."

Wrong again, the RL has proven to perform quite well off road, in situations that 99% of drivers won't even experience.

I believe I pointed out that the vehicle's off-road capabilities would be more than suitable for most buyers, but the other vehicles in that comparison better fit the needs of that other 1%-5%.

As for towing, others do have a bit more, but Honda does not fluff numbers, especially with the payload which is higher than the Tacoma anyway. Where did they get their numbers?!

Where were any numbers inaccurate? The others had more towing capacity, so that means that it can't tow as much as some vehicles in this group. And the payload capacity was pointed out and praised within the review, but it is unrelated to towing capacity.



"Interior quality is a low point, more than a few hard, cheap plastic trim pieces don't fit together well."

What? Where? The fit and finish like all Honda's blows away Toyota. The only thing that bothers me are the door handle grabs (the size and appearance). The interior of the RL is excellent.

Do note that the specific vehicle reviewed was an early production base RT, higher trims of vehicles produced later may not have the same quality issues. However, I have not been the only reviewer to note interior quality lapses.

[Ridgeline4wd_Archive]

IFCAR wrote (View Post): › docWrite("quote")Hello. Came across this thread on the MSN Search, and as the site admin for IFCAR and the author of this comparison test, I thought I'd better chime in.

EDIT: Please see my responses within the quote.

Fair enough and welcome to the board!!!! :)

It will be interesting if you do a followup review based on a later release RidgeLine.

:)

[Ridgeline4wd_Archive]

colorider wrote (View Post): › docWrite("quote")IFCAR wrote (View Post): › docWrite("quote")Hello. Came across this thread on the MSN Search, and as the site admin for IFCAR and the author of this comparison test, I thought I'd better chime in.

EDIT: Please see my responses within the quote.

Fair enough and welcome to the board!!!! :)

It will be interesting if you do a followup review based on a later release RidgeLine.

:)

I will, but not immidiately. Exploring the site beyond that review will show far too many blank pages and dead links for there to be time to re-do a review.

There will probably be a modification in about six months when the other vehicles' 2006 versions go on sale, with modifications to pricing and equipment, and a later-release (and possibly a higher-trim, depending on the set price range) Ridgeline will be reviewed at that time.

[Ridgeline4wd_Archive]

IFCAR wrote (View Post): › docWrite("quote")Hello. Came across this thread on the MSN Search, and as the site admin for IFCAR and the author of this comparison test, I thought I'd better chime in.

EDIT: Please see my responses within the quote.

CBR600rr wrote (View Post): › docWrite("quote")Lame review, even if they picked the RL as #1 :evil:

"The new-for-2006 Ridgeline is the most carlike vehicle in this group. There's a good reason for that: the vehicle is largely based on Honda's Pilot SUV"

Wrong! Maybe they should learn to read or maybe do some actual research! The reality below.

"Contrary to speculation, the Honda Ridgeline is not a "Honda Pilot with a bed." Engineers started with Honda's Global Light Truck platform and transformed 93 percent of the components into a mission-specific platform with seven high strength steel cross members that create a fully boxed ladder frame structure with full integration into the unibody frame. Further differentiation includes unique suspension component designs, 100-percent unique sheetmetal and a 95-percent exclusive interior" - From Honda

What I meant there was not that the Ridgeline was simply a "Pilot with a bed." Quite the contrary, as Honda did an impressive job differentiating between the products. However, Honda did start with the same platform as the Pilot to build the vehicle, which is what I meant.

"The Ridgeline has little to no off road ability beyond poorly-maintained unpaved roads, and can't tow as much as some vehicles in this group."

Wrong again, the RL has proven to perform quite well off road, in situations that 99% of drivers won't even experience.

I believe I pointed out that the vehicle's off-road capabilities would be more than suitable for most buyers, but the other vehicles in that comparison better fit the needs of that other 1%-5%.

As for towing, others do have a bit more, but Honda does not fluff numbers, especially with the payload which is higher than the Tacoma anyway. Where did they get their numbers?!

Where were any numbers inaccurate? The others had more towing capacity, so that means that it can't tow as much as some vehicles in this group. And the payload capacity was pointed out and praised within the review, but it is unrelated to towing capacity.



"Interior quality is a low point, more than a few hard, cheap plastic trim pieces don't fit together well."

What? Where? The fit and finish like all Honda's blows away Toyota. The only thing that bothers me are the door handle grabs (the size and appearance). The interior of the RL is excellent.

Do note that the specific vehicle reviewed was an early production base RT, higher trims of vehicles produced later may not have the same quality issues. However, I have not been the only reviewer to note interior quality lapses.




I was just defending a vehicle that I have a lot of faith in, sorry if it sounded so harsh.

You just need to understand, like I said before Honda took a big risk producing this truck and it's important that the reviews are as accurate as possible.

I still stand by my responses. As for the towing comment that was based on information from Honda. Here's the quote from the Honda detailed spec sheet, "True 5,000 lb. towing capability". What they mean is the 5,000 lb. rating is with passengers and cargo (payload). Since I've towed in the real world I know first hand how Toyota has "fluffed" their numbers. I've towed with a 1995.5 4 cyl Tacoma, 1999 V6 Tacoma and a 2000 V6 4Runner, they all struggled when towing near max weight for both trailer and payload. Honda wanted to make sure 5,000 lbs. means 5,000 lbs! Not 5,000 lbs. struggling when you add any extra weight in the vehicle itself.

For the fit and finish, yes some have complained, mostly about the door pulls which IMO are ugly. Regardless, 'fit and finish' means quality not aesthetics. I would be interested to know exactly what flaws you found if any.

As for the comment about the Ridgeline's offroad ability "The Ridgeline has little to no off road ability beyond poorly-maintained unpaved roads, and can't tow as much as some vehicles in this group." No matter how you spin it, this makes it sound like the vehicle is next to worthless off road. Completely untrue and it's not just me that thinks so. That being said off road ability is also driver dependent, even with the Ridgeline so there could be an issue there. I've taken Honda Civic's down roads that many people would not bring their Ridgeline's down!

I won't go deep into the Pilot, GLT platform subject, but I do have to comment. Honda has done a good job, but sorry to say most reviewers have done a good job helping to spread the myth that the Ridgeline is "a Pilot with a bed". This includes a recent review by Car and Driver, here's the quote: "This first for Honda eschews pickup norms such as a ladder frame and solid-axle rear suspension for a carlike unibody chassis and independent rear suspension." The problem with this is it's both right and wrong, since as you know the RL has both a unibody and fully boxed ladder frame.

Overall I think the C & D review was good and I was happy to see that the RL won over the others, not because I am biased, but because it's clearly the superior truck!

D

[Ridgeline4wd_Archive]

CBR600rr wrote (View Post): › docWrite("quote")IFCAR wrote (View Post): › docWrite("quote")Hello. Came across this thread on the MSN Search, and as the site admin for IFCAR and the author of this comparison test, I thought I'd better chime in.

EDIT: Please see my responses within the quote.

CBR600rr wrote (View Post): › docWrite("quote")Lame review, even if they picked the RL as #1 :evil:

"The new-for-2006 Ridgeline is the most carlike vehicle in this group. There's a good reason for that: the vehicle is largely based on Honda's Pilot SUV"

Wrong! Maybe they should learn to read or maybe do some actual research! The reality below.

"Contrary to speculation, the Honda Ridgeline is not a "Honda Pilot with a bed." Engineers started with Honda's Global Light Truck platform and transformed 93 percent of the components into a mission-specific platform with seven high strength steel cross members that create a fully boxed ladder frame structure with full integration into the unibody frame. Further differentiation includes unique suspension component designs, 100-percent unique sheetmetal and a 95-percent exclusive interior" - From Honda

What I meant there was not that the Ridgeline was simply a "Pilot with a bed." Quite the contrary, as Honda did an impressive job differentiating between the products. However, Honda did start with the same platform as the Pilot to build the vehicle, which is what I meant.

"The Ridgeline has little to no off road ability beyond poorly-maintained unpaved roads, and can't tow as much as some vehicles in this group."

Wrong again, the RL has proven to perform quite well off road, in situations that 99% of drivers won't even experience.

I believe I pointed out that the vehicle's off-road capabilities would be more than suitable for most buyers, but the other vehicles in that comparison better fit the needs of that other 1%-5%.

As for towing, others do have a bit more, but Honda does not fluff numbers, especially with the payload which is higher than the Tacoma anyway. Where did they get their numbers?!

Where were any numbers inaccurate? The others had more towing capacity, so that means that it can't tow as much as some vehicles in this group. And the payload capacity was pointed out and praised within the review, but it is unrelated to towing capacity.



"Interior quality is a low point, more than a few hard, cheap plastic trim pieces don't fit together well."

What? Where? The fit and finish like all Honda's blows away Toyota. The only thing that bothers me are the door handle grabs (the size and appearance). The interior of the RL is excellent.

Do note that the specific vehicle reviewed was an early production base RT, higher trims of vehicles produced later may not have the same quality issues. However, I have not been the only reviewer to note interior quality lapses.




I was just defending a vehicle that I have a lot of faith in, sorry if it sounded so harsh.

You just need to understand, like I said before Honda took a big risk producing this truck and it's important that the reviews are as accurate as possible.

I still stand by my responses. As for the towing comment that was based on information from Honda. Here's the quote from the Honda detailed spec sheet, "True 5,000 lb. towing capability". What they mean is the 5,000 lb. rating is with passengers and cargo (payload). Since I've towed in the real world I know first hand how Toyota has "fluffed" their numbers. I've towed with a 1995.5 4 cyl Tacoma, 1999 V6 Tacoma and a 2000 V6 4Runner, they all struggled when towing near max weight for both trailer and payload. Honda wanted to make sure 5,000 lbs. means 5,000 lbs! Not 5,000 lbs. struggling when you add any extra weight in the vehicle itself.

For the fit and finish, yes some have complained, mostly about the door pulls which IMO are ugly. Regardless, 'fit and finish' means quality not aesthetics. I would be interested to know exactly what flaws you found if any.

As for the comment about the Ridgeline's offroad ability "The Ridgeline has little to no off road ability beyond poorly-maintained unpaved roads, and can't tow as much as some vehicles in this group." No matter how you spin it, this makes it sound like the vehicle is next to worthless off road. Completely untrue and it's not just me that thinks so. That being said off road ability is also driver dependent, even with the Ridgeline so there could be an issue there. I've taken Honda Civic's down roads that many people would not bring their Ridgeline's down!

I won't go deep into the Pilot, GLT platform subject, but I do have to comment. Honda has done a good job, but sorry to say most reviewers have done a good job helping to spread the myth that the Ridgeline is "a Pilot with a bed". This includes a recent review by Car and Driver, here's the quote: "This first for Honda eschews pickup norms such as a ladder frame and solid-axle rear suspension for a carlike unibody chassis and independent rear suspension." The problem with this is it's both right and wrong, since as you know the RL has both a unibody and fully boxed ladder frame.

Overall I think the C & D review was good and I was happy to see that the RL won over the others, not because I am biased, but because it's clearly the superior truck!

D

I wouldn't say that Honda took a great risk in building the Ridgeline, as a risk would imply that there was a good chance that it would fail. And it is unlikely that any Honda would do poorly enough to be considered a failure, not only are its customers a loyal bunch (reliability, resale value, and bias all contribute to this), but Htypically does a good enough job at whatever they do that buyers will always be attracted to their designs.

As to the towing, you are probably correct. However, that aspect of the review was based entirely on the vehicles' specifications. I don't own a 5,000-lb trailer, so I can't evaluate how different vehicles handle it myself, so I have to go with the numbers provided by the manufacturer, be they padded or understated.

As to the interior, I have no problem with the aesthetics. However, there were low quality plastics on the lower door and upper dash of the Ridgeline RT that I sampled, as well as a few ill-fitting trim pieces on the lower dash.

As to the off-road ability, I was trying to emphasize the difference between the abilities of the Ridgeline and those of the other trucks. That may have been a bit hard on the Honda, but I feel it was necessary to make a contrast between it and the truckier vehicles.

And I recognize that you are simply defending a vehicle that you have a lot of faith in, which is the reason I typically avoid single-brand or single-vehicle forums, as most members tend to be truly devoted fans who can sometimes be hard to reason with (I'm speaking generally mind you, members here seem reasonably rational and literate), and it is hard to criticize a vehicle without being attacked from all directions.


By the way, while here, you've disagreed with every complaint I've had about the Ridgeline. Assuming that you don't think that it's perfect in every way, what do you think are its flaws?

[Ridgeline4wd_Archive]

IFCAR wrote (View Post): › docWrite("quote")
CBR600rr wrote (View Post): › docWrite("quote")IFCAR wrote (View Post): › docWrite("quote")Hello. Came across this thread on the MSN Search, and as the site admin for IFCAR and the author of this comparison test, I thought I'd better chime in.

EDIT: Please see my responses within the quote.

CBR600rr wrote (View Post): › docWrite("quote")Lame review, even if they picked the RL as #1 :evil:

"The new-for-2006 Ridgeline is the most carlike vehicle in this group. There's a good reason for that: the vehicle is largely based on Honda's Pilot SUV"

Wrong! Maybe they should learn to read or maybe do some actual research! The reality below.

"Contrary to speculation, the Honda Ridgeline is not a "Honda Pilot with a bed." Engineers started with Honda's Global Light Truck platform and transformed 93 percent of the components into a mission-specific platform with seven high strength steel cross members that create a fully boxed ladder frame structure with full integration into the unibody frame. Further differentiation includes unique suspension component designs, 100-percent unique sheetmetal and a 95-percent exclusive interior" - From Honda

What I meant there was not that the Ridgeline was simply a "Pilot with a bed." Quite the contrary, as Honda did an impressive job differentiating between the products. However, Honda did start with the same platform as the Pilot to build the vehicle, which is what I meant.

"The Ridgeline has little to no off road ability beyond poorly-maintained unpaved roads, and can't tow as much as some vehicles in this group."

Wrong again, the RL has proven to perform quite well off road, in situations that 99% of drivers won't even experience.

I believe I pointed out that the vehicle's off-road capabilities would be more than suitable for most buyers, but the other vehicles in that comparison better fit the needs of that other 1%-5%.

As for towing, others do have a bit more, but Honda does not fluff numbers, especially with the payload which is higher than the Tacoma anyway. Where did they get their numbers?!

Where were any numbers inaccurate? The others had more towing capacity, so that means that it can't tow as much as some vehicles in this group. And the payload capacity was pointed out and praised within the review, but it is unrelated to towing capacity.



"Interior quality is a low point, more than a few hard, cheap plastic trim pieces don't fit together well."

What? Where? The fit and finish like all Honda's blows away Toyota. The only thing that bothers me are the door handle grabs (the size and appearance). The interior of the RL is excellent.

Do note that the specific vehicle reviewed was an early production base RT, higher trims of vehicles produced later may not have the same quality issues. However, I have not been the only reviewer to note interior quality lapses.




I was just defending a vehicle that I have a lot of faith in, sorry if it sounded so harsh.

You just need to understand, like I said before Honda took a big risk producing this truck and it's important that the reviews are as accurate as possible.

I still stand by my responses. As for the towing comment that was based on information from Honda. Here's the quote from the Honda detailed spec sheet, "True 5,000 lb. towing capability". What they mean is the 5,000 lb. rating is with passengers and cargo (payload). Since I've towed in the real world I know first hand how Toyota has "fluffed" their numbers. I've towed with a 1995.5 4 cyl Tacoma, 1999 V6 Tacoma and a 2000 V6 4Runner, they all struggled when towing near max weight for both trailer and payload. Honda wanted to make sure 5,000 lbs. means 5,000 lbs! Not 5,000 lbs. struggling when you add any extra weight in the vehicle itself.

For the fit and finish, yes some have complained, mostly about the door pulls which IMO are ugly. Regardless, 'fit and finish' means quality not aesthetics. I would be interested to know exactly what flaws you found if any.

As for the comment about the Ridgeline's offroad ability "The Ridgeline has little to no off road ability beyond poorly-maintained unpaved roads, and can't tow as much as some vehicles in this group." No matter how you spin it, this makes it sound like the vehicle is next to worthless off road. Completely untrue and it's not just me that thinks so. That being said off road ability is also driver dependent, even with the Ridgeline so there could be an issue there. I've taken Honda Civic's down roads that many people would not bring their Ridgeline's down!

I won't go deep into the Pilot, GLT platform subject, but I do have to comment. Honda has done a good job, but sorry to say most reviewers have done a good job helping to spread the myth that the Ridgeline is "a Pilot with a bed". This includes a recent review by Car and Driver, here's the quote: "This first for Honda eschews pickup norms such as a ladder frame and solid-axle rear suspension for a carlike unibody chassis and independent rear suspension." The problem with this is it's both right and wrong, since as you know the RL has both a unibody and fully boxed ladder frame.

Overall I think the C & D review was good and I was happy to see that the RL won over the others, not because I am biased, but because it's clearly the superior truck!

D

I wouldn't say that Honda took a great risk in building the Ridgeline, as a risk would imply that there was a good chance that it would fail. And it is unlikely that any Honda would do poorly enough to be considered a failure, not only are its customers a loyal bunch (reliability, resale value, and bias all contribute to this), but Htypically does a good enough job at whatever they do that buyers will always be attracted to their designs.

As to the towing, you are probably correct. However, that aspect of the review was based entirely on the vehicles' specifications. I don't own a 5,000-lb trailer, so I can't evaluate how different vehicles handle it myself, so I have to go with the numbers provided by the manufacturer, be they padded or understated.

As to the interior, I have no problem with the aesthetics. However, there were low quality plastics on the lower door and upper dash of the Ridgeline RT that I sampled, as well as a few ill-fitting trim pieces on the lower dash.

As to the off-road ability, I was trying to emphasize the difference between the abilities of the Ridgeline and those of the other trucks. That may have been a bit hard on the Honda, but I feel it was necessary to make a contrast between it and the truckier vehicles.

And I recognize that you are simply defending a vehicle that you have a lot of faith in, which is the reason I typically avoid single-brand or single-vehicle forums, as most members tend to be truly devoted fans who can sometimes be hard to reason with (I'm speaking generally mind you, members here seem reasonably rational and literate), and it is hard to criticize a vehicle without being attacked from all directions.


By the way, while here, you've disagreed with every complaint I've had about the Ridgeline. Assuming that you don't think that it's perfect in every way, what do you think are its flaws?


But the review carries a LOT of weight. Kinda like that Newsweek thing. A bad hardware review can kill a product, even if the review was flawed, lots of folks see one thing in a review and run the other way.

Better to not state "facts" then to state incorrect ones.

My beefs with wht I have seen of the Ridgeline?.. (I'm still on the fence).

1) They could have given it a bit of a diet. A couple inches narrower would have helped.
2) The bedliner appears to be an issue. A spray-in coating seems to be neccessary. (anyone done this yet?)
3) Wind noise due to the windshield moulding. My guess is a minor recall in the future.

[Ridgeline4wd_Archive]

I like the width. gives more room inside and wind noise is a rare occasion which I fortunately have not had. I addressed be bed issue on your other thread, and no I am not following you around to disagree with you. Just giving my .02. I was looking at the colorado and I was really bothered by the fact it was so narrow, among other things. The Car and Driver report carries much more weight with me than that one but thats just me.

[Ridgeline4wd_Archive]

[quote="halabar";p="4804]
My beefs with wht I have seen of the Ridgeline?.. (I'm still on the fence).

1) They could have given it a bit of a diet. A couple inches narrower would have helped.
2) The bedliner appears to be an issue. A spray-in coating seems to be neccessary. (anyone done this yet?)
3) Wind noise due to the windshield moulding. My guess is a minor recall in the future.[/quote]

My $.02 on the above: (FWIW)
1) Having owned a Pilot for 2 1/2 years before the RidgeLine - I appreciate the width as it provides better stability and handling. The width is also what allows such a wide bed (4'+) in basically a mid-size truck.
2) I've had spray in liners and they will scratch as well. There are various products on the market to help hide the scratches.
3) This been a problem on some - mine has no wind noise. Honda is aware of the "problem" and I'm sure it will be resolved.

Good Luck with whatever you decide on.

:)

[Ridgeline4wd_Archive]

Let me clarify regarding the width. I have no problems with it in regard to driving, it's just parking it. I've got some tight places I need to park on occasion, so it's gonna be interesting to find spots.

After seeing the complaints about the scratches in the bed, I thought a spray-liner to help protect might be a good thing.

Perhaps just the mat like others have suggested.

BTW: My wife gave me the green-light to buy the Ridgeline over a Grand Cherokee, so it looks like I'm joining you soon, as soon as I can find a green RTS. (or RT).

A dealer told me today that only 13% of the units off the line are RT's.