Hauling or Crawling?: 2006 Honda Ridgeline RTS

[siegen]

the new avalanche interior is so far above the ridgelines horrific interior.  i have no idea why siegen could even try to argue that.

I don't recall arguing that. If you read my post, I left out exterior and interior appearance since they are completely subjective.

i am not sure how chevy can build MILLIONS of trucks

LOTS of mexicans.

[ocnblu]

Oh no you dint go there, siegen. No you dint.

And a freakin' Tundra? The atomic tadpole? Excuse me while I reintroduce my lunch to your monitor.

[Flybrian]

Or does it just tow/haul better?

Yes.

Does it have more features

Yes.

better safety rating

The new one likely will be at least on par.

better resale value

Irrelevant

better mileage (when not towing)

Yes. EPA figures bear that out.

better handling

Yes. Though neither are sports cars.

better acceleration (when not towing)

More torque = yes

better braking

New one probably will

better build quality

Yes.

and better ride quality?

175042[/snapback]

Yes. GM trucks are reknowned for their ride quality and smoothness compared to other fullsizers.

[Intrepidation]

Yes.

Yes.

The new one likely will be at least on par.

Irrelevant

Yes. EPA figures bear that out.

Yes. Though neither are sports cars.

More torque = yes

New one probably will

Yes.

Yes. GM trucks are reknowned for their ride quality and smoothness compared to other fullsizers.

175108[/snapback]

[cmattson]

Hey Fly, you don't mind if I chime in with some stats to back you up, do you?

Appearance items (interior/exterior styling) are generally subjective - so it is hard to compare. The gap between the Ridgeline and the Avalanche is so large between the Ridgeline's interior and the Avalanche that, in this case, you can make a definitive case for the Avalanche. The Ridgeline's interior isn't cohesive and is built around hard plastics. It's embarassingly bad. Go sit in one & you'll instantly see what I mean.

As for measurables:

Acceleration (0-60):

Avalanche 5.3l = 8.5s

Avalanche 6.0l = ????

Ridgeline 3.5l = 8.0s

Winner = Undecided

Note: I'm reluctant to give this to Honda as the '06 Avalanche 2500 pulls 7.5s in the 0-60. I can't find '07 info to declare a winner here.

Horsepower:

Avalanche 5.3l = 325hp

Avalanche 6.0l = 366hp

Ridgeline 3.5l = 247hp

Winner = Chevrolet (in a rout I might add)

Torque:

Avalanche 5.3l = 340ft-lbs

Avalanche 6.0l = 380ft-lbs

Ridgeline 3.5l = 245ft-lbs

Winner = Chevrolet (in another rout)

Fuel Economy

Avalanche 5.3l = 15/21

Avalanche 6.0l = ??

Ridgeline 3.5l = 16/21

Winner = Honda, barely - and give the award to Chev if you plan to tow

Payload

Avalanche: 1350 lbs

Ridgeline: 1100 lbs

Winner = Chevrolet

Towing Capacity

Avalanche: 7000/8000 lbs

Ridgeline: 5000 lbs

Winner = Chevrolet

Utility

Avalanche, enclosed rear bed + midgate

Honda, under-bed trunk

Winner = push, each provide unique utility

Reliability

Undetermined. This is Honda's first attempt at building a truck in the US. As witnessed by the multiple million-mile entries on GM full-size trucks @ chevy200k.com, I'd be heavily inclined to lean towards Chevy, but I'll leave this undecided.

Resale (2006my)

Avalanche: Trade in value of 22,717 - 25,589. Sold new at 25,466 - 28,687 (89.21%-89.20%)

Ridgeline: Trade in value of 19,414 - 24,227. Sold new at 22,365 - 27,809 (86.80%-87.11%)

Winner = Chevrolet

You certainly don't want me to go into things like ground clearance, interior volume, bed volume - I think we all know who'll handily win those comparisons too..

Sources:

0-60:

http://autoweek.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?...16001/1006/FREE

http://www.autos.com/autos/sport%20utility...alanche_2500/ls

http://www.theautochannel.com/news/2005/05/26/106997.html

HP & Torque:

http://media.gm.com/us/chevrolet/en/produc...nche/index.html

http://autos.msn.com/research/vip/Spec_Gla...eline&trimid=-1

Mileage, Payload, Towing Capacity:

http://media.gm.com/us/chevrolet/en/produc...nche/index.html

http://autos.msn.com/research/vip/Spec_Gla...eline&trimid=-1

Resale values:

http://www.edmunds.com/new/2006/chevrolet/...salevalues.html

http://www.edmunds.com/new/2006/honda/ridg...salevalues.html

[Intrepidation]

Hey Fly, you don't mind if I chime in with some stats to back you up, do you?

Appearance items (interior/exterior styling) are generally subjective - so it is hard to compare.  The gap between the Ridgeline and the Avalanche is so large between the Ridgeline's interior and the Avalanche that, in this case, you can make a definitive case for the Avalanche.  The Ridgeline's interior isn't cohesive and is built around hard plastics.  It's embarassingly bad.  Go sit in one & you'll instantly see what I mean.

As for measurables:

Acceleration (0-60):

Avalanche 5.3l = 8.5s

Avalanche 6.0l = ????

Ridgeline 3.5l = 8.0s

Winner = Undecided

Note: I'm reluctant to give this to Honda as the '06 Avalanche 2500 pulls 7.5s in the 0-60.  I can't find '07 info to declare a winner here.

Horsepower:

Avalanche 5.3l = 325hp

Avalanche 6.0l = 366hp

Ridgeline 3.5l = 247hp

Winner = Chevrolet (in a rout I might add)

Torque:

Avalanche 5.3l = 340ft-lbs

Avalanche 6.0l = 380ft-lbs

Ridgeline 3.5l = 245ft-lbs

Winner = Chevrolet (in another rout)

Fuel Economy

Avalanche 5.3l = 15/21

Avalanche 6.0l = ??

Ridgeline 3.5l = 16/21

Winner = Honda, barely - and give the award to Chev if you plan to tow

Payload

Avalanche: 1350 lbs

Ridgeline: 1100 lbs

Winner = Chevrolet

Towing Capacity

Avalanche: 7000/8000 lbs

Ridgeline: 5000 lbs

Winner = Chevrolet

Utility

Avalanche, enclosed rear bed + midgate

Honda, under-bed trunk

Winner = push, each provide unique utility

Reliability

Undetermined.  This is Honda's first attempt at building a truck in the US. As witnessed by the multiple million-mile entries on GM full-size trucks @ chevy200k.com, I'd be heavily inclined to lean towards Chevy, but I'll leave this undecided.

Resale (2006my)

Avalanche: Trade in value of 22,717 - 25,589.  Sold new at 25,466 - 28,687 (89.21%-89.20%)

Ridgeline: Trade in value of 19,414 - 24,227.  Sold new at 22,365 - 27,809 (86.80%-87.11%)

Winner = Chevrolet

You certainly don't want me to go into things like ground clearance, interior volume, bed volume - I think we all know who'll handily win those comparisons too..

Sources:

0-60:

http://autoweek.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?...16001/1006/FREE

http://www.autos.com/autos/sport%20utility...alanche_2500/ls

http://www.theautochannel.com/news/2005/05/26/106997.html

HP & Torque:

http://media.gm.com/us/chevrolet/en/produc...nche/index.html

http://autos.msn.com/research/vip/Spec_Gla...eline&trimid=-1

Mileage, Payload, Towing Capacity:

http://media.gm.com/us/chevrolet/en/produc...nche/index.html

http://autos.msn.com/research/vip/Spec_Gla...eline&trimid=-1

Resale values:

http://www.edmunds.com/new/2006/chevrolet/...salevalues.html

http://www.edmunds.com/new/2006/honda/ridg...salevalues.html

175119[/snapback]

very nice. Hey out of curiousity, what if any parts of the Avalanche's interior are made with soft materials?

[cmattson]

If you look at a pre-2007, virtually nothing on the interior of the Av is made of soft materials. But in the new 2007's, the door 'upholstery', arm rests, center console, and parts of the upper dash are soft(er) materials. Unfortunately there are parts of the interior that still are hard plastic. I don't think a full soft-material finish a-la VW would work well (long-term durability-wise) for a truck -- just my opinion.

For comparison, in terms of 'hard material use', I'd say the Ridgeline is on par with the outgoing GMT-8xx trucks. In terms of interior styling, I'd say the Ridgeline is on par with a 1980 Turismo. I'm not trying to be funny here - that is the closest thing I can associate it with that I've seen. It's really, really poor. I'd put the Nissan Titan/Armada's quirky interior ahead of it, which speaks alot.

Sources:

http://www.cardomain.com/member_pages/show...7160_3_full.jpg

http://autodeadline.com/detail?source=Hond...038509&mime=JPG

Edited August 3, 2006 by cmattson

[Intrepidation]

If you look at a pre-2007, virtually nothing on the interior of the Av is made of soft materials.  But in the new 2007's, the door 'upholstery', arm rests, center console, and parts of the upper dash are soft(er) materials.  Unfortunately there are parts of the interior that still are hard plastic.  I don't think a full soft-material finish a-la VW would work well (long-term durability-wise) for a truck -- just my opinion.

175147[/snapback]

probably not, but it's nice the arm rest s and some parts of the dash are softer.

[siegen]

Thank you cmattson for actually taking the time to put together that post.

Just one quick correction, the Avalanche is rated to 15/20 for the 4WD version, and it isn't full-time. I'm also wondering if that rating comes from it being used in 2 Hi mode. That is still good mileage though when considering the weight of the Avalanche.

Avalanche definately wins in towing/hauling. Again, I don't think anybody here is arguing that.

Yes.

Yes.

The new one likely will be at least on par.

Irrelevant

Yes. EPA figures bear that out.

Yes. Though neither are sports cars.

More torque = yes

New one probably will

Yes.

Yes. GM trucks are reknowned for their ride quality and smoothness compared to other fullsizers.

175108[/snapback]

Let's compare features. This is all based off of Edmund's comparison, and I only list what is standard. The Avalanche has a number of options that aren't available on the Ridgeline, but it's already more expensive as it is.

Things the Avalanche (LT 1500 4dr 4WD, $36,390 after destination) has standard the Ridge doesn't:

4wd - the major advantage of the Avalanche (other than the engine) is the 4wd low mode, something the Ridgeline also sorely needs. Although in most daily driving conditions, people will use the 2HI mode

Running boards

Tonneau Cover

Simulated Wood

Ventilated Rear Discs (Ridge's rear disc are not ventilated)

One-touch power windows for passenger (only on driver's for Ridge)

retained accessory power

DRL and dusk-auto detect

6-yr rust warranty (5-yr on Ridge)

Edit:

1-yr free Onstar

Things the Ridgeline (RTL 4dr AWD w/Leather and Navi, $35,490 after destination) has the Avalanche doesn't:

5-speed Auto

full-time AWD with

Braking assist and Traction control

DVD navigation with voice activation

6-cd player w/ 7 speakers and subwoofer

Anti-theft alarm with remote

Power moonroof

Automatic climate control w/ Air filtration

Aux Transmission cooler

8-way driver adjustable seat (Avalanche is 6) & Lumbar support

Passenger Heated Seat

Speed-proportioning power steering

3 rear headrests (2 on Avalanche)

5-yr drivetrain warranty (3-yr on Avalanche)

Edit:

Side air bags and Side curtain airbags with rollover sensor.

Heated driver and passenger seats.

Three free months of XM radio

Is it just me or does the Ridgeline blow away the Avalanche in features (price for price)? Unless Edmunds has some seriously messed up information that is.

Edited August 3, 2006 by siegen

[Flybrian]

Is it just me or does the Ridgeline blow away the Avalanche in features (price for price)? Unless Edmunds has some seriously messed up information that is.

As usual, they do to an extent. Not your fault, and why I hate Edmunds. This 'anti-theft alarm with remote' is something the Avalanche has as part of its keyless entry system. 4WD vs AWD is an advantage in Avalanche's column due to its versatility. Avalanche also has standard Stabilitrak across the line. I don't know how much value you would put on the midgate. So, declaring that the Ridgeline 'blows away' the Avalanche in features really depends on what you value more. If you're that inclined towards the luxury goodies, maybe you should be considering either vehicle.

I also assume you selected the 1LT. Stepping up to the 2LT would add a great many of these features as well as exclusives like remote start. Its another $1500 but factor in the likelihood of an equal (if not greater) incentive/rebate on the Avalanche as time goes by, and its generally a wash. Even for 2006 models which lack some of the equipment, there's up to $6000 cash back.

What you're really talking about are two similar but very different vehicles. Buying an Avalanche gives you many luxury features, a slight compromise in ride quality, and a large gain in utility (towing, hauling, etc). Choosing a Ridgeline gives you a few more toys, better urban handling, the Honda name, but compromises much of the strong utility characteristics of the Avalanche.

When it comes down to it, either will handle your day-to-day hauling needs just fine, but the Avalanche is overbuilt in comparison. You may not need that much capability 9/10 times, but on that 10th time, you may wish you had it. Pay a slight bit more now and never regret it when the time comes.

That's the rationale behind an Avalanche.

[Intrepidation]

As usual, they do to an extent. Not your fault, and why I hate Edmunds. This 'anti-theft alarm with remote' is something the Avalanche has as part of its keyless entry system. 4WD vs AWD is an advantage in Avalanche's column due to its versatility. Avalanche also has standard Stabilitrak across the line. I don't know how much value you would put on the midgate. So, declaring that the Ridgeline 'blows away' the Avalanche in features really depends on what you value more. If you're that inclined towards the luxury goodies, maybe you should be considering either vehicle.

I also assume you selected the 1LT. Stepping up to the 2LT would add a great many of these features as well as exclusives like remote start. Its another $1500 but factor in the likelihood of an equal (if not greater) incentive/rebate on the Avalanche as time goes by, and its generally a wash. Even for 2006 models which lack some of the equipment, there's up to $6000 cash back.

What you're really talking about are two similar but very different vehicles. Buying an Avalanche gives you many luxury features, a slight compromise in ride quality, and a large gain in utility (towing, hauling, etc). Choosing a Ridgeline gives you a few more toys, better urban handling, the Honda name, but compromises much of the strong utility characteristics of the Avalanche.

When it comes down to it, either will handle your day-to-day hauling needs just fine, but the Avalanche is overbuilt in comparison. You may not need that much capability 9/10 times, but on that 10th time, you may wish you had it. Pay a slight bit more now and never regret it when the time comes.

That's the rationale behind an Avalanche.

175169[/snapback]

nicely put

[cmattson]

I would say it has an advantage, I wouldn't say it blows it away by any means; especially when you consider all of the other advantages I listed - from room to hp/torque, resale, etc.

Not to be petty, but here's some std stuff you missed on the Chev LT1:

1) Assist-steps

2) Foglamps

3) Daytime running lamps

4) Automatic exterior lights (auto headlight on/off)

5) Heated rear-view mirrors

6) Steel reinforced safety cage

7) Trailer Hitch Equipment (harness, connector, 2in receiver)

Rear-seat heat ducts

9) Auto-dimming rearview mirror

10) OnStar w/1-year free OnStar service

11) Rear-seat audio controls

Source:

http://www.chevrolet.com/avalanche/features/

Edited August 3, 2006 by cmattson

[Drew Dowdell]

Utility

Avalanche, enclosed rear bed + midgate

Honda, under-bed trunk

Winner = push, each provide unique utility

I'm going to disagree on this one. Can a Ridgeline carry a 4x8 sheet of drywall.... in bad weather?

[siegen]

I would say it has an advantage, I wouldn't say it blows it away by any means; especially when you consider all of the other advantages I listed - from room to hp/torque, resale, etc.

Not to be perry, but here's some std stuff you missed on the Chev LT1:

1) Assist-steps

2) Foglamps

3) Daytime running lamps

4) Automatic exterior lights (auto headlight on/off)

5) Heated rear-view mirrors

6) Steel reinforced safety cage

7) Trailer Hitch Equipment (harness, connector, 2in receiver)

Rear-seat heat ducts

9) Auto-dimming rearview mirror

10) OnStar w/1-year free OnStar service

11) Rear-seat audio controls

The Avalanche does have a TQ and HP advantage, but the lighter weight and better gearing of the Ridgeline allow it to accelerate quicker without a big load. The Avalanche gains the advantage when a significant amount of weight is added or a heavy trailer.

1) Isn't that part of the running boards?

2) Missed that.

3) Abbreviated DRL

4) Got that dusk-auto detect

5) Standard on Ridgeline as well.

6) Unibody.

7) That is an option on the Ridgeline (standard on the RTX model though)

8 ) Standard on Ridgeline as well.

9) Aye

10) Two words: BlondeStar (google it)

11) Edmunds says that's an option.

A few things I missed on the Ridgeline list:

Side air bags and Side curtain airbags with rollover sensor.

Heated driver and passenger seats.

Three free months of XM radio

As usual, they do to an extent. Not your fault, and why I hate Edmunds. This 'anti-theft alarm with remote' is something the Avalanche has as part of its keyless entry system. I don't know how much value you would put on the midgate. So, declaring that the Ridgeline 'blows away' the Avalanche in features really depends on what you value more. If you're that inclined towards the luxury goodies, maybe you should be considering either vehicle.

I also assume you selected the 1LT. Stepping up to the 2LT would add a great many of these features as well as exclusives like remote start. Its another $1500 but factor in the likelihood of an equal (if not greater) incentive/rebate on the Avalanche as time goes by, and its generally a wash. Even for 2006 models which lack some of the equipment, there's up to $6000 cash back.

When it comes down to it, either will handle your day-to-day hauling needs just fine, but the Avalanche is overbuilt in comparison. You may not need that much capability 9/10 times, but on that 10th time, you may wish you had it. Pay a slight bit more now and never regret it when the time comes.

It really does come down to your needs. If you're towing motorcyles, ATV's, etc, the Ridgeline is sufficient. If you're towing a good sized boat or a Jeep, the Ridgeline can get by, but the Avalanche will do better. I am more keen to the daily use, so the extra towing and hauling ability of the Avalanche isn't too impressive when you look at all of the luxury and safety features the Ridgeline has.

I did select the LT1, but even with the LT2's 6-cd player, remote, and auto climate control, you're still lacking a lot of nice features. Features like Navigation with voice recognition, subwoofer, heated seats, and safety features like traction control and side air bags to name a few.

Buying an Avalanche gives you many luxury features, a slight compromise in ride quality, and a large gain in utility (towing, hauling, etc). Choosing a Ridgeline gives you a few more toys, better urban handling, the Honda name, but compromises much of the strong utility characteristics of the Avalanche.

The Avalanche has less luxury features, probably equal ride quality, and a large compromise in on-road handling (watch the 3rd video in that site I linked and tell me if an Avalanche can do that :AH-HA_wink:). The Avalanche does offer much better towing/hauling ability, but as far as utility goes, they both have unique and useful features.

4WD vs AWD is an advantage in Avalanche's column due to its versatility. Avalanche also has standard Stabilitrak across the line.

The biggest advantage I see with the Avalanche is 4wd low, which is useful for off-roading or towing up a steep grade at slow speeds (like a launch ramp). But other than that, the Ridgeline's AWD system is not limiting when towing (it is an active system, and is always transferring power to the rear when accelerating). How many of these vehicles will see more than just mild off-roading (like a dirt trail)? Of those, how much of their time will be spent on the road vs off? Considering the Ridgeline's full-time AWD system and traction control and it's big advantage on the road (where there are other people and safety is a bigger issue), I would definately give the advantage to the Ridgeline.

Edited August 3, 2006 by siegen

[BuddyP]

If the fuel economy is anything like my '03 Av, the '07 will be getting 17 city and 22-23 hwy in real world driving. My '03 is rated at 13-17 but gets a consistant 19.5-20.5 hwy and I get around 16 putterin around town and back and forth to town from home. With more power/torque you aren't on the gas as much as you are with a lesser torque/power motor.

As far as Utility, don't forget the Av also has 2 locking storage compartments along with the locking enclosed rear bed + midgate. So with the Av you get the 2 storage compartments to the Ridgelines one (though the Ridge's one is probably same volume as the Av's 2). Problem with the Ridge is that if you have a load in the bed, now you can't access the compartment unless you unload the bed so you can access it. That there is a minus. Now you also have the Av's larger rear bed that has more volume and can open up larger by use of the midgae. Plus the hard tonnaeu keeps it locked up and dry.

As far as safty, take a Ridge and a Av facing each other 600 feet apart and then mash the gas on each and drive them into each other.... which one would you rather be in? Seriously, I want you to answer this one!

The Av is so much more of a vehicle than the Ridge, after all you comparing a car to a truck. The Av gives you more grunt, power, towing, hauling capacity, versatility, interior room, etc. for a very minute difference in price. And it get's practically the same milage. The Ridge's milage is piss poor for a small V6 in a lighter car like vehicle.

I also want to note, after fully inspecting a fully loaded Ridge at NAIAS this past Jan, it is blatently less luxurious than the Av. The seats are small and offer little support. I purposly checked out the Ridge due to all the comments about it in mags and being picked as truck of the year. The interior materials are nothing but hard plastics, the same materials the media used to always hound GM about. While looks are based on personal opinions, my personal opinion is the new Av has 3 times the interior that the Ridge has. Better seats, a LOT better looking dash, and lots of interior room.

Edited August 3, 2006 by BuddyP

[BuddyP]

Oh BTW, the 5.3 is also a flex fuel motor... enviromentally friendly!

[Flybrian]

Also, another advantage the Chevy has is standard double entendre. For example, "Help! I'm trapped in an Avalanche!" or "An Avalanche is headed for that town!"

Honda's Ridgeline doesn't feature a double entendre.

[BuddyP]

Yet another point... say your hauling a small ATV in the back of your Ridge like Honda show's on their website, then you have a flat tire, what do you do? With the ATV in the back you can't access the spare tire! The tire is really only accessable if the bed of the truck is empty. I guess if your hauling an ATV you need to have ramps with you, but it's doubtful you'll fit ramps in the back along with the ATV, or a couple passengers to help you left the ATV out of the bed of the car. Too bad you couldn't haul the ATV with the tailgate shut like you can on an AV.

Edited August 3, 2006 by BuddyP

[Sixty8panther]

*ridgeline

?

174997[/snapback]

I'm sorry, yes I meant Ridgeline NOT Avalanche.

The past few days have been a nightmare.

Between the craziness of moving into another

house and getting about 30% of my required

sleep I'm a bit oblivious.

I envy people who have one address their whole life.

[Drew Dowdell]

Yet another point... say your hauling a small ATV in the back of your Ridge like Honda show's on their website, then you have a flat tire, what do you do? With the ATV in the back you can't access the spare tire! The tire is really only accessable if the bed of the truck is empty. I guess if your hauling an ATV you need to have ramps with you, but it's doubtful you'll fit ramps in the back along with the ATV, or a couple passengers to help you left the ATV out of the bed of the car. Too bad you couldn't haul the ATV with the tailgate shut like you can on an AV.

175277[/snapback]

I haul bricks, sand, stone, large quantities of drywall in my Av. I don't even know what I'd do if I was hauling the same stuff with a Ridgeline and had a flat.

Call AAA I guess?

[HarleyEarl]

The Ridgeline seems like a pickup car for girls. And heck they need vehicles too, to haul stuff. What do girls haul anyways?

I wonder if lesbians are attracted to this vehicle to haul their big dogs?

[Intrepidation]

The Ridgeline seems like a pickup car for girls.  And heck they need vehicles too, to haul stuff.  What do girls haul anyways? 

I wonder if lesbians are attracted to this vehicle to haul their big dogs?

175413[/snapback]

[siegen]

Yet another point... say your hauling a small ATV in the back of your Ridge like Honda show's on their website, then you have a flat tire, what do you do? With the ATV in the back you can't access the spare tire! The tire is really only accessable if the bed of the truck is empty. I guess if your hauling an ATV you need to have ramps with you, but it's doubtful you'll fit ramps in the back along with the ATV, or a couple passengers to help you left the ATV out of the bed of the car. Too bad you couldn't haul the ATV with the tailgate shut like you can on an AV.

175277[/snapback]

How are you going to get the ATV out when you reach your destination? It would be a pain to get a flat and have to remove the ATV to get the spare, but if you are hauling an ATV, chances are you have a couple of planks of wood (the poor-man's ramp) or ramps with you. If only they had the built-in ramps like the dodge concept, that's a great idea.

Edited August 3, 2006 by siegen

[ShadowDog]

How are you going to get the ATV out when you reach your destination? It would be a pain to get a flat and have to remove the ATV to get the spare, but if you are hauling an ATV, chances are you have a couple of planks of wood (the poor-man's ramp) or ramps with you. If only they had the built-in ramps like the dodge concept, that's a great idea.

175499[/snapback]

Regardless of what's actually "IN" the bed when you get a flat, the fact that you have to take it all "OUT" to access that spare is a royal pain in the ass. Any Ridgeline owner in that circumstance will likely agree, or has enough time not to care. All I know is, if I get a flat, I'd rather winch down the spare, and winch up the flat under the bed without ever having to open the tailgate.

[cmattson]

How are you going to get the ATV out when you reach your destination? It would be a pain to get a flat and have to remove the ATV to get the spare, but if you are hauling an ATV, chances are you have a couple of planks of wood (the poor-man's ramp) or ramps with you. If only they had the built-in ramps like the dodge concept, that's a great idea.

175499[/snapback]

LOL: You can fit 2 planks of wood + an ATV in a Ridgeline bed? Seriously, I saw one at the autoshow with an ATV loaded in it and it took the whole bed. At the time I marveled at how they got the ATV in the back with it being such a snug fit. As it is, the ATV I saw had to sit on the folded-down gate. There's not a chance you can fit one in a Ridgeline with the gate closed. On a serious note, I'm sure you could strap it in somewhere if you needed to. You could put the wood on the bottom and load the ATV on top of it, but that would kind of defeat the purpose of bringing the wood along to use as a ramp, wouldn't it?

[pow]

Here goes another 13 pager... How hard can it be???

If you tow and haul a lot, get the Avalanche. If you plan on driving it everyday, around town and for occasional Christmas tree or flat-pack furniture, get the Ridgeline.

[siegen]

Here goes another 13 pager...    How hard can it be???

13 page? That's nothing. Try 167 with 2,333 replies.

[regfootball]

If you look at a pre-2007, virtually nothing on the interior of the Av is made of soft materials.  But in the new 2007's, the door 'upholstery', arm rests, center console, and parts of the upper dash are soft(er) materials.  Unfortunately there are parts of the interior that still are hard plastic.  I don't think a full soft-material finish a-la VW would work well (long-term durability-wise) for a truck -- just my opinion.

For comparison, in terms of 'hard material use', I'd say the Ridgeline is on par with the outgoing GMT-8xx trucks.  In terms of interior styling, I'd say the Ridgeline is on par with a 1980 Turismo.  I'm not trying to be funny here - that is the closest thing I can associate it with that I've seen.  It's really, really poor.  I'd put the Nissan Titan/Armada's quirky interior ahead of it, which speaks alot.

Sources:

http://www.cardomain.com/member_pages/show...7160_3_full.jpg

http://autodeadline.com/detail?source=Hond...038509&mime=JPG

175147[/snapback]

ah, that turismo interior reminds me of the night in college one of my buddies pissed in the open window of another buddies *charger*..024 or whatever it was (yes alcohol was involved)...that is what that thing looked like and recalling sitting in a ridgeline interior i'd have to say you're definitely on the right track there.

There's a newly remodeled Honda dealer about 2 miles from my work. I'd love to own the land right next to it. If i did, I'd get Chevy to haul about 100 Avalanches on the lot right next to it, so folks could get past the hype and see how badly the Avalanche trounces the Bentline...first hand. instead of reading CR and getting int he car and driving straight to the honda place, magazine in hand.

[regfootball]

I typed in 'Ridgeline bent frame' on Google and it led me to this post on ED MUNDS town hall

Okay, those bent frames & body damage on the Ridgeline's were scary to read about. No less than 5 have body creasing by the C-Pillar! 

Sure, 2 of them were CPO vehicles purchased used from a Honda dealer, but there's no excuse on a vehicle with only 10k on it. Can't believe the dealer told the guy to keep driving it. An independent frame shop ferified his fears. Bent frame. Was a shame he was villified by fellow owners before a resolution was posted.  All the bumper VIN ID's strongly imply the vehicle hasn't been in an accident.

I'd feel better about this if the owner had towed with it or something. 

Then again, all the aggressive "Rugged" advertising for this urban truck may come back to bite Honda. They need to proudly target the city dwellers and leave the banjo playing music out of it.  Paul Bunyan's truck it ain't!

Edited August 4, 2006 by regfootball

[Flybrian]

Funny. I typed in the same thing, and it said...

Did you mean: Ridgeline bent frame

[regfootball]

oh MAN you should SEE the posts on the RIDGELINE board on Edmunds TH.....

grab a beer and enjoy it......

holy crap.

bent frames and bodies

water leakage in the cabin destroying the inside

rust

rattles

oil usage

strut/suspension damage

powertrain hesitation

really bad fuel economy

engine fires

HOLY CRAP

Edited August 4, 2006 by regfootball

[chevelle454]

What a pile of SH*T

[funkypunnk]

There is a reason every police dept. in the country prefers full frame cars, they don't fold up when you hit a curb. That is why the Ridgeline is a joke. Trucks have to be tough!!!!

[Newbiewar]

Hey Fly, you don't mind if I chime in with some stats to back you up, do you?

Appearance items (interior/exterior styling) are generally subjective - so it is hard to compare.  The gap between the Ridgeline and the Avalanche is so large between the Ridgeline's interior and the Avalanche that, in this case, you can make a definitive case for the Avalanche.  The Ridgeline's interior isn't cohesive and is built around hard plastics.  It's embarassingly bad.  Go sit in one & you'll instantly see what I mean.

As for measurables:

Acceleration (0-60):

Avalanche 5.3l = 8.5s

Avalanche 6.0l = ????

Ridgeline 3.5l = 8.0s

Winner = Undecided

Note: I'm reluctant to give this to Honda as the '06 Avalanche 2500 pulls 7.5s in the 0-60.  I can't find '07 info to declare a winner here.

Horsepower:

Avalanche 5.3l = 325hp

Avalanche 6.0l = 366hp

Ridgeline 3.5l = 247hp

Winner = Chevrolet (in a rout I might add)

Torque:

Avalanche 5.3l = 340ft-lbs

Avalanche 6.0l = 380ft-lbs

Ridgeline 3.5l = 245ft-lbs

Winner = Chevrolet (in another rout)

Fuel Economy

Avalanche 5.3l = 15/21

Avalanche 6.0l = ??

Ridgeline 3.5l = 16/21

Winner = Honda, barely - and give the award to Chev if you plan to tow

Payload

Avalanche: 1350 lbs

Ridgeline: 1100 lbs

Winner = Chevrolet

Towing Capacity

Avalanche: 7000/8000 lbs

Ridgeline: 5000 lbs

Winner = Chevrolet

Utility

Avalanche, enclosed rear bed + midgate

Honda, under-bed trunk

Winner = push, each provide unique utility

Reliability

Undetermined.  This is Honda's first attempt at building a truck in the US. As witnessed by the multiple million-mile entries on GM full-size trucks @ chevy200k.com, I'd be heavily inclined to lean towards Chevy, but I'll leave this undecided.

Resale (2006my)

Avalanche: Trade in value of 22,717 - 25,589.  Sold new at 25,466 - 28,687 (89.21%-89.20%)

Ridgeline: Trade in value of 19,414 - 24,227.  Sold new at 22,365 - 27,809 (86.80%-87.11%)

Winner = Chevrolet

You certainly don't want me to go into things like ground clearance, interior volume, bed volume - I think we all know who'll handily win those comparisons too..

Sources:

0-60:

http://autoweek.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?...16001/1006/FREE

http://www.autos.com/autos/sport%20utility...alanche_2500/ls

http://www.theautochannel.com/news/2005/05/26/106997.html

HP & Torque:

http://media.gm.com/us/chevrolet/en/produc...nche/index.html

http://autos.msn.com/research/vip/Spec_Gla...eline&trimid=-1

Mileage, Payload, Towing Capacity:

http://media.gm.com/us/chevrolet/en/produc...nche/index.html

http://autos.msn.com/research/vip/Spec_Gla...eline&trimid=-1

Resale values:

http://www.edmunds.com/new/2006/chevrolet/...salevalues.html

http://www.edmunds.com/new/2006/honda/ridg...salevalues.html

175119[/snapback]

well the resale values dont supprise me because Chevys trucks have the best resale values in the industry, and last i checked a Chevy's resale is also higher then a GMC...

Fords Dodges lose a massive amount of equity once they walk off the lot... the silverado on the other hand holds a resale value that of or higher then the retail value assuming proper milage...

[regfootball]

I'm going to disagree on this one.  Can a Ridgeline carry a 4x8 sheet of drywall.... in bad weather?

175188[/snapback]

one sheet might too heavy for it to carry. drywall is heavy you know.

[regfootball]

Also, another advantage the Chevy has is standard double entendre. For example, "Help! I'm trapped in an Avalanche!" or "An Avalanche is headed for that town!"

Honda's Ridgeline doesn't feature a double entendre.

175272[/snapback]

roof framer to his assistant....."hey buddy, we need to take that RIDGE LINE down"

[Drew Dowdell]

one sheet might too heavy for it to carry.  drywall is heavy you know.

177066[/snapback]

and if it *could* carry sheets of drywall in poor weather <which it can't>, if you got a flat tire, you'd have to remove the cargo.

how much utility is there in that?

[regfootball]

and if it *could* carry sheets of drywall in poor weather <which it can't>, if you got a flat tire, you'd have to remove the cargo.

how much utility is there in that?

177163[/snapback]

LOL! i know!

my friggin aztek can carry dryall, almost all of it covered, at least more so than the ridgeline.

[Drew Dowdell]

just pointing out, the avalanche still has freakishly good resale. I'm still disappointed I can't find one with the features I want with the price I want at any mileage.

[ocnblu]

Someone who means a lot to me drives a red Redgeline, lifted a bit with bigger tires.

[CanadianBacon94]

<!--QuoteBegin-cmattson+Aug 2 2006, 06:52 PM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(cmattson @ Aug 2 2006, 06:52 PM)</div><div class='quotemain'>

very nice. Hey out of curiousity, what if any parts of the Avalanche's interior are made with soft materials?

old gen

handle on the dash, door panel arm rests steering wheel spokes (Lots of cutlines)

New gen:

arm rest, door panel (none on the dash its self)(alot smoother)

Edited May 21, 2011 by CanadianBacon94

[FAPTurbo]

I knew having the 3.5L in the truck wasn't the greatest idea, but then again, with the numbers Honda claimed in terms of towing and hauling, I was skeptical the day my Dad fell in love with it and gave the future Avalanche a run for its money.

Hi past self! He STILL hasn't bought that Avalanche and continues to use the Sierra from 1990. Damn you GM and your dependable trucks.

[Drew Dowdell]

Given my experience with Honda AWD currently, I have no confidence in it's ability to be used when needed in towing situations.