siegen

You're thinking Japanese Civic, because the European Civic is completely unique to Europe, and is a 5 door hatch.

It's not just the mileage though, emissions are less, and power is increased thoughout the rev range (weight increases as well by over 100 lbs, but the power more than makes up for it). I'm not 100% sure, but I believe the engine is shut off completely when idle at a stop light like other hybrids, this would show a very large increase in average MPG for someone who does mostly city driving in a crowded city. It's not that the torque curve is flat (which it isn't in a GM V6), but the engine is designed to have its peak TQ occur earlier, which is good for mileage, city driving, but not good for performance tests like 0-60 and 1/4 mile or that all so important peak hp number =). Aside from that, how do you know that the GM 6 cylinder gets better real-world numbers than the Honda V6 (when compared to their respective EPA ratings)?

I'm surprised Honda hasn't offered a Hybrid version, using a powerplant similar to the Accord Hybrid. They managed to increase the Accord's EPA mileage from 20/29 to 29 / 37, both 5sp auto sedan, and only a 3k increase in the MSRP. We aren't talking a weak hybrid powerplant either, the 0-60 times increased for the hybrid over the 5sp auto non-hybrid. If they could find a way to offer an Odyssey hybrid model that was still under 40k MSRP, but kept most of its features, they should have a winner (although I personally could never imagine someone paying almost 40k for a minivan, lol).

So for a vehicle to be classified as a truck, it has to be body on frame? According to the dictionary, both Webster's and American Heritage, a truck is "any of various heavy motor vehicles designed for carrying or pulling loads" or "an automotive vehicle for hauling loads" (among other non related definitions). This still isn't completely clear, as "heavy motor vehicle" and "load" are not defined, but it didn't say anything about vehicle specifics. Apparently any vehicle can be considered a truck, so long as it fits under those guidelines. A load can be anything that's not a passenger, but I couldn't find a specific classification for "heavy motor vehicle" unfortunately, and I'm not about to go looking through government sites. Maybe somebody knows this answer. Regardless, the thing that gets me is that people constantly say that the Ridgeline is not a real truck, based entirely off the thinking that a real truck has to be body on frame, rear wheel drive, and have a V8 in it.

I believe it was around 20K after it was said and done, this was back in 2003, and I don't think there were as many incentive programs. Also, even though this is the company truck, I take very good care of it (it's the truck I drive to and from work every day), like I do with my car, so it does not receive any abuse (as most "company vehicles" do), I pay for insurance and maintenance on it. The brake problem is more than just stopping distance, and the rattle is not the spare, but this isn't a maintenance forum. I'll look into the service bulletin though and hopefully get that 1st-2nd shift worked out. I took a look at new truck models on nada.com, and found this, which I think is a pretty close match to the Ridgeline. Chevy Silverado Crew cab, 4wd, LS model (cheapest model they had listed), and the MSRP is around 30k. I'm sure the incentives and givin the current economy, you could get one from a dealer for several thousand less. It doesn't appear to have near the features of the Ridgeline, although I couldn't find MPG, vehicle weight, or the load capacity of the Ridgeline. The towing capacity was the same at 5000 lbs. The Ridgeline looks expensive, but when you consider everything, it's not bad. I'm not saying a Ridgeline could do the work I need my Sierra to though, because it can't. I need the large bed, and a relatively high load rating (600-1000 lb runs are pretty common, sometimes a little more). Transmission gearing and vehicle weight play a big part in their performance though. I couldn't find any numbers, but I'll bet the Ridgeline weighs a bit less (due to the unibody frame), and the additional gear allows for more tq multiplication in the first 4 gears (instead of 4th gear having to be an "overdrive" freeway gear). And again, the Ridgeline may only get marginally better MPG, but if you were to take one and strip away all of the features down to what that Silverado has, I'll bet you'd see hundreds of pounds shaved and several mpg better. Go to the Honda site and look at just what it comes with, you won't see traction, stability control, 6 air bags, heated mirrors, or any of the like on that Silverado.

Toyota has had way too many recalls lately. By mistakes I don't mean putting in an underpowered engine or a styling decision, I mean forgetting to properly torque down certain nuts, or not properly weather-proofing a certain panel. Things that cause recalls, those are mistakes, and Toyota has been making a lot lately.

You should read my other posts. I drive an 04 Sierra (1500) almost every day. Up until about 3 years ago, I felt the same way most of you do, and would never own a foreign car. I see a lot of people comparing the mileage of the Ridgeline with American trucks, and claiming that their V8's and 4.3L V6's only get marginally less mileage while having more power. I could say the same thing, since my GMC Sierra (V8) gets about 20mpg mostly freeway driving. That is really good mileage for a truck, but the Sierra comes with very minimal features, which include a tape player, manual windows, single cab (not extended), no ABS, no A/C, it's pretty bare bones to say the least (2wd). Even the base model Ridgeline comes with a lot of features including awd. I'm not going to browse around Chevy or Ford's sites to look for features, but I'd imagine the mileage of the Ridgeline should be compared more with something like a fully-loaded awd SUV (like a Denali or something?). Since I'm coming into this argument with little backing (most of the articles I read, I toss or do not save the links), only what is in my memory and my personal experience, I took the time to look at a bunch of Ridgeline reviews, and tried to find as many from Domestic-based magazines or organizations (of course ignoring anything directly from Honda). Most of the reviews ended up liking the Ridgeline. Its safety and road-going features are important even for a truck. I know a lot of you put off these things, but the ability for a vehicle to not get in a wreck is very important. Not only for the occupants, but for the people in cars driving around the truck (like me), and pedestrians. As far as body-on-frame, unibody, and ladder frame construction goes. My comment saying that current trucks are out-dated, is exactly that. They've been using the base technology for over 50 years, with improvements of course, but nothing completely different. Why fix it if it isn't broke? Because it costs too much money to develope a new way of doing things. The way trucks and SUV's are built right now works, and it is certainly the most cost-effective way. The majority of Americans believe so much in the way things are done right now anyway. Honda is giving them an alternative for light-duty truck use, despite its infancy, and everybody has very closed minds about it. Here's some reviews: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6

I'm not saying the ridgeline can do anything a full size pickup truck can do. It is not designed to at all. I drive an '04 Sierra almost every day for work. The poor handling, squeeky bed, slow 1st-2nd shift, and bad brakes after only 14k miles are making me hate it. The Ridgeline would make a better condidate for my work entirely if it weren't for the small bed. I guess what I'm saying is current "trucks" are very outdated in their design, like the article states, and something NEEDS to change. People bash the Ridgeline because it isn't as good as a "real truck". The Ridgeline has a superior chassis, the only downside is its low displacement engine and lack of a low-range gear ratio. Honda does need to offer an ext cab 2 door version, with similar seating, but a longer bed (for my purposes at least). But then again, they aren't trying to compete with "real trucks" at least yet. I think GM, Ford, and Dodge need to get with it, and start building their trucks from the ground up, rather than starting at the frame up. So practical is when you buy a large truck or SUV to drive to the grocery store and your desk-job at work every day? Since for a large part of truck and SUV drivers, that's all they do. Am I really? People who need current trucks for their intended purpose, whether it be towing a large boat, or hauling a lot of stuff, then for now, yes. For people who drive them just because they feel safer in a big vehicle, think they need them, feel manly driving them, or think driving a car is for pansies, then is it so hard to believe?

Let the bashing begin... :( Poor Ridgeline, such a great truck, yet the stubborn American buyers still won't part with their crappy handling, outdated trucks.

Let's just hope they only emulate the profit part, and not the "quality" part, as of late. But then again I don't like Hyundai so I hope they follow in Toyota's foot steps exactly. Get too big and full of themselves, and then start making mistakes left and right because they're trying to do too much at once.

Having the rear view mirrors on the doors does look a bit odd, but it is more functional. I think the dual dash design works just fine and look good too. I would never have it in a sports car, but for a family sedan, it makes it much easier to see what speed you're going. I like the steering wheel, it is out of place for that kind of car though. I don't mind it in the Si, but in a sedan, they should have gone with a more normal steering wheel. Again, the short hood on the Si does look odd, but on the sedan it doesn't, and obviously it's more practical. I guess this car definately puts function over form, even though it is not that bad looking, as long as you aren't comparing it to a sports car like the S2000. I would easily buy it over a Chevy Malibu or Ford Focus, as those look too out-dated and "normal".

It is rather funny. Toyota is on its 3rd generation of their Hybrid system, which isn't exactly something to gloat about (specially since it won't show up in cars for another 2 years, maybe 3 years before it hits the USDM). Honda is already on the 3rd generation of its Hydrogen fuel cell system, with prototypes on the street (and one drivin by a family in CA), and not to mention the HES system, which may make Fuel Cell vehicles even more convenient than gasoline vehicles and do away with gas stations. Come on Toyota, how long are you going to milk hybrid electric before you realize it is not the way of the future?? Of course I guess Toyota could sell Hybrid Gasoline-Cow-Poop vehicles with their marketting prowess. It is not, since they rate them in km/litre. The current Insight is rated to 36km/litre, which is 22.37 miles per 0.264 US gallons, which is 84 MPG approximately. Over there people don't have lead feet like we do, so they actually get better mileage out of their cars :lol:

Damn Canadians, sharing models between Honda and Acura lineups... Makes them look like the domestics down here. I'm glad AHM doesn't do that. The CSX does look better than the USDM Sedan though, as does the JDM sedan. The interior looks very sporty IMO, I don't see what you guys think is ugly about it.

The head and tail lights need to change, because they do not fit that type of car at all. Flat panel monitors in the trunk? lol, gotta love Toyota. They're gonna make a really extreme concept to get everyone excited. And then when it comes out, it will look just like the current xA, but with the roof chopped off. Oh, and just what I wanted, less privacy!. Now people can see when I have to scratch my balls.

I haven't really been following the Auto industry too closely up until recently, but is this many recalls from one manufacturer common? Because it seems like every 3 or 4 days there is a another recall. And not small ones either, all of them are well over 100k vehicles, and now well over a million? Damn.

The rear end is butt-ugly, another crappy use of quad tail lights, somehow eveing uglier than the Cobalt. I still have yet to see a better design than the R34:

The new Civics do have DBW (Drive by Wire). This sucks for Honda, but thankfully most of the vehicles weren't sold yet, and no customers were effected. I wonder what the cause for the problem is, the article is kind of vague.

The only camry's in the movie would be the ones that flash by the screen for a second doing the speed limit on the freeway, while Bond and pursuers fly by at 130mph in their sports cars. If Toyota is lucky, they will choose a Camry as one of cars that gets wrecked, giving it a couple more seconds on the screen. Not that you'd be able to see the Toyota symbol anyway, as it's being crushed by two semi's as Bond narrowly escapes in his sports car (did I say the pursuers were driving semi's? wait that's the Matrix).

Nissan may be using the new SAE testing standards on some of its models, but Honda and Toyota are the only manufacturers so far to use the new testing on all of their engines, new and old. At least I'm pretty sure they're the only ones, there may be others. It looks like most manufacturers will be using the new testing standard on their new engines as they come out, but are skipping retesting their old ones (I believe the dead-line isn't for another couple years). Whether this is do to only financial reasons or to avoid the risk of some of their old engines testing much lower then with previous testing standards (and subsequently being bashed by the media for "over-rating"), I don't know. I have a feeling it's both though.

Nice site, I didn't know Edmunds had that either. Looks like only Engine Oil/Filter, AT, and Tire changes for your Alero. What kind of air filter does that have in it? Or do they just not care if it gets dirty lol? After looking at the Schedule for my Acura Integra (99), I do have to replace spark plugs, air filter and coolant (which I do anyway), but the oil/filter change interval is only every 7,500k miles, as opposed to 3,000k. It is a 90's car however (starting in 94), and can't really be compared to a 2000 car. If I compare a more comparable car like the 04 Acura TSX (mid size sedan), the maintenance schedule looks pretty good. Oil/filter every 5k miles, Air filter every 15k miles, and MTF every 60k miles. Not bad for maintenance, as the air filter really should be replaced even if they don't call for it. Edit: Just checked an even more comparible car, the 02 Accord (in automatic sedan V6 trim), and looks even better yet. Only oil/filter changes every 3,750 miles, with ATF and air filter every 30k miles.

First regarding the original article. Thanks for posting it, I actually am too lazy to go to the link and read the whole thing, lol. I honestly don't see what the point is of arguing over the original article's content. It says, essentially, Honda doesn't like incentives, and doesn't use them, which has hurt the Ridgeline sales. They, however, are not going to use incentives to boost sales, and will just wait it out by reducing production instead. Maybe not the smartest thing to do if profit is all they cared about, but they are sticking to their ideals and I'm very happy about it. I can't stand most car commercials as it is. From the Edmunds article: What does this have to do with anything? They made it sound like that was part of the reason some editors didn't like the vehicle. How about they blame the oncoming vehicle instead? Or thank the Ridgeline's superior handling in allowing them swerve to avoid the oncoming vehicle rather than nailing it head on. I think the video on the Edmunds review sums up the Ridgeline well. The suspension or body do not hinder the off road capabilities, but rather the lack of low range gearing and ground clearance (according to them). Of course these can both be fixed, I'd imagine Honda will do better in the future, and have a low range gearbox option as well as more ground clearance. As far as the shocks go, it's hard to say how much abuse the editors put it through, but the shocks shouldn't have blown regardless. I do, however, question the dealer's evaluation on all 4 shocks being blown, as I know most dealers like to sell more parts whenever they can. And I also wish they wouldve elaborated more then just saying "the Ridgeline seemed to be handling a bit strange", as that doesn't really say anything. I think more testing is in order! =) Yeh, kind of a lame quote, but it was obviously coming from a Minivan driver's point of view, and the rest of the paragraph is more important for drive-ability of the truck:

Back to the mileage debate quickly. I drive an 04 GMC Sierra (base model) every week for work (usually freeway driving). It gets about 20mpg, which is very good. However, it has 2wd, a tape player, manual windows, and that's about it (it has freeway gearing as well). You can't compare a truck like that to the Ridgeline, which has all of these features.

I didn't say it couldn't tow, haul loads, or go off road. I just said their are specific vehicles that do it better. I said the Ridgeline can do a bit of everything, which it can. Handling and safety are huge factors to consider when purchasing a vehicle, even if you plan on using the vehicle for off-road or hauling purposes (because 90% of the time you will be driving on normal roads amongst traffic with little or no load). I still haven't seen a Ridgeline ad though. Maybe Honda is trying too hard to market this vehicle to the wrong type of people??

How come everyone is bashing the Ridgeline? It is a Sports Utility Truck. It isn't designed to compete with Full Size trucks, and it isn't designed to tow 40ft boats or go off-road like a Jeep 4x4. It handles better than any truck or SUV on the road, and can do a bit of everything. A large majority of the F150, Sierra, and RAM drivers (those who don't use them for their intended purpose) out there would be better off driving a Ridgeline, due to its better mileage, better emissions, better handling (accident avoidance), and safety features.

Check out this write up on the new Sport Concept unveiled by Honda over at the Temple of Vtec (you don't need to join). It looks extremely good IMO. Very aggressive, wide, low, and sporty. The only thing I really don't like is the interior (which looks a little overdone, shouldve been black like a Type R would be). Honda also unveiled their Race car version Civic Si and the HFP package for the Civic Si at the SEMA show. If you want info about that, just navigate back to the main page on www.vtec.net and look at those articles. While you're there be sure to check out the Temple of Vtec's own customized Civic Si. http://www.vtec.net/news/news-item?news_item_id=438107