Overall, they liked it, but the tone of the review was way too negative. They really had very little to complain about and even liked the 4-speed, but of course they make the review less pleasing to read by adding in a bunch of needless crap (and sometimes false, needless crap).
Here's how the review starts for example:
"First, the bad news: GM is releasing its newest pickup truck, the Silverado, into one of the most hotly contested segments around -- at a time when full-size-vehicle-bashing is fast becoming a new sport. Additionally, Toyota (whose market share continues to grow) is on the verge of releasing its first crack at this lucrative full-size pickup-truck market. And if that weren't enough, Honda and Nissan have offered their own interpretation of the full-size pickup truck for American buyers and both have hit the market with a thud."
Now, here are some blatantly wrong things:
Toyota is on its THIRD try, not first. So they get free passes until they actually make something halfway competitive?
The Titan and Ridgeline have been anything but thuds, more like duds, especially the Titan.
The Ridgeline is NOT an "interpretation" of the full-size pickup. First, they say that no Tundra has been full-size, but now they say that the Ridgeline is? Something isn't right... Didn't MT even review the Ridgeline against MIDSIZE trucks, or was that C&D?
How is the Titan a different interpretation of a truck? It offers nothing the competition doesn't.