Ridgeline is your tow-rig pick?

So sad. But, then again that's what the majority of uneducated people pick too. A Unibody car. . wait, minivan. . .wait, suv. . wait. . "truck" with a V6 that is LUCKY to get 20mpg unloaded with a rediculous payload layout (hope you're not hauling when you get that flat) and the propensity to buckle the bedsides when loaded and hit uneven pavement. YEah, no thanks. I'll keep my 2006 GMC Crew Cab 2WD with the 4.8L V8 (makes more hp AND tq) that gets 24 unloaded on the highway and 21 in town and will tow 8k+ lbs without a problem, even though it may "only" rated at 7500 and still get 16. And with it, I can carry 900lbs in the bed and not worry about wrinkling my pretty bed sides or having a flat because the tire is still accessible.

See, this is what the biggest issue is with people buying trucks. They don't buy what they NEED, they buy the biggest, baddest beast on the planet and then are suprised when it gets 12mpg. Could we have gone 4wd? Sure, but it is far from beinga necessity. Could we have gone with the 5.3 or even the 6.0L? Sure, but why? The 4.8L carries itself and whatever you're hauling fine. With the GM catalogs, you can build the exact truck you need. Honduh, well they offer one. And, like most honduh offerings of late, it's size and lack of power give it terrible fuel economy. Most of my customers are seeing 16-17mpg on a daily basis. That's not economial.

Then there's the comfort arena. I can sit in that driver's seat for 33 hours (Indy to Tucson via DFW non-stop) with the wife, 2 dogs and a bed of luggage and christmas presents, knocking down an average of 23mpg roundtrip and never get tired of that seat. No discomfort other than a feeling of claustraphobia of being locked in a vehicle with your wife and 2 dogs for 30 hours. . .

Bobzilla wrote: So sad. But, then again that's what the majority of uneducated people pick too.

uneducated? come on.. lets see on your chevy you.. spend more in gas.. more in maint.. and lose more in resale..

when the diesel ridgline comes out I will buy one. I've had fullsize trucks before, unless you use it for work everyday there is no need for me to commute in one. Maybe a 15 year old truck for a tow rig on the weekends, but the ridgeline does exactly what most people need it to do.. be reliable and get them to work while not murdering them at the pump. It has the ability to tow small stuff which is what people need..

been around this before.. use the search button..

It's also in this months issue.. . try reading? Best I got.

Bobzilla wrote: It's also in this months issue.. . try reading? Best I got.

same pick as last year..

hmm won 2 years in a row.. maybe.. maybe the grm guys think fullsize trucks are impractical for the average american/weekend warrior driver

fleshed out original post cause, "use the search button" is a poor forum response sorry

But, again, like I pointed out, it IS murdering people at the pump. If people bought what they needed and not what was flashiest, they can, and would, have the best of both worlds. Being a FS truck owner the majority of my life, I have YET to own a truck that did not fit my needs best, carry more than this car thing and get BETTER fuel economy.

Maybe numbers aren't your forte, but last time I checked 24 beats 20 every time. More interior space/room, better payload capacity, better towing and known durability. Gee Mr Obvious. . I never made the connection.

Oh. . other than this time of being wrong, this is the best mag on the stand, hands down. Keep up the good work!

I have to agree with Bobzilla here... I have 4.7L Tundra that is a 7/8ths copy of the Ford/Chevy stuff only w/o the crappy interior and rattles. If it hadn't been so cheap at auction I'd have bought a Chevy w/ a 5.7 because while the Toy has been a great truck it is juuust barely enough truck for what I need. But it DOES have:

• a spare you can reach with the bed full
• a nice sturdy frame with a long wheelbase
• enough motor to pull 7500lbs, 2 adults, 3 kids, dog, tools/luggage
• I can only muster 18/20mpg combined and 12 towing but mine is a 4x4 that is usually loaded down with something heavy so that seems about "good enough" since I commute in a small car.

The Honda has none of the above but looks like a good bet if what you need is a bigger Sube Outback that will go in snow and in a pinch one day while your real truck is getting inspected or something... pull something light to the track if you are a flatlander. Here in the mountains... no way unless you like the smell of ATF.

Bobzilla wrote: But, again, like I pointed out, it IS murdering people at the pump. If people bought what they needed and not what was flashiest, they can, and would, have the best of both worlds. Being a FS truck owner the majority of my life, I have YET to own a truck that did not fit my needs best, carry more than this car thing and get BETTER fuel economy. Maybe numbers aren't your forte, but last time I checked 24 beats 20 every time. More interior space/room, better payload capacity, better towing and known durability. Gee Mr Obvious. . I never made the connection.

Apples and Oranges. The Ridgeline is for Honda people who need versatility, not full size truck capability. The Honda is a great multi purpose vehicle. Sure people can tow moderately with it, but thats not what it is for. It does everything the average person needs it to do flawlessly.

I hate the Ridgeline. I think its ugly, stupid, ugly.

But that being said, I also think that it makes sense for a lot of people. It is an excellent Mom-mobile, it can haul enough to make it worth it for the majority of the population. The only real downside to it is that it gets mediocre gas mileage. I haven't read the article yet (I'm away at school and Dad hasn't sent it yet), but I think that it is a good choice, especially if you have a family.

But can anybody give me any input as to the seats? We had a 2000 Odyssey, and it was an excellent vehicle (towed a boat too) except for the seats. Cut off about halfway through my upper leg, and I was only 14 when we got rid of it, and even now I have short stubby legs.

Then why would it be "the pick" for a tow rig? Again, why not get what you need? It's a compromise on every aspect. It cannot haul, it's mediocre at towing, it gets terrible economy and the rear seats are ok for short distances, but I'd not force someone to sit back there for 10-15 hours.

So in respect ot this pick, I am apples to apples. You cannot go and pick a car as a truck to do trucklike things and then not expect to get comparisons to real trucks, with more capabilities and better economy.

Bobzilla wrote: Then why would it be "the pick" for a tow rig? Again, why not get what you need? It's a compromise on every aspect. It cannot haul, it's mediocre at towing, it gets terrible economy and the rear seats are ok for short distances, but I'd not force someone to sit back there for 10-15 hours.

What are most people towing? A stripped down race-car that weighs next to nothing. No, it wouldn't work for the mountain-folk, but it would work great for me (if I had anything to tow).

We've been towing our boat (~2500lb) with a Crown Vic the past three years, and it has worked flawlessly. I gotta figure that the Ridgeline would be as good or better.

Your crown vic has a full frame and V8 power (torque) that the Ridgeline does not have. It likely gets better fuel economy loaded and unloaded as well.

For those of us that cannot afford a $7000+ aluminum trailer to tow our toys on, that means we're using a 1500lb steel trailer + the 1800lb car plus tires, tools and luggage. We're pushing 4k lbs already.

Bobzilla wrote: See, this is what the biggest issue is with people buying trucks. They don't buy what they NEED, they buy the biggest, baddest beast on the planet and then are suprised when it gets 12mpg. Could we have gone 4wd? Sure, but it is far from beinga necessity. Could we have gone with the 5.3 or even the 6.0L? Sure, but why? The 4.8L carries itself and whatever you're hauling fine. With the GM catalogs, you can build the exact truck you need. Honduh, well they offer one. And, like most honduh offerings of late, it's size and lack of power give it terrible fuel economy. Most of my customers are seeing 16-17mpg on a daily basis. That's not economial.

With this second paragraph, you contradict yourself.

I just tow a 700lb trailer + 2400lb car = 3100lb. Why do I need a vehicle that can tow over twice that?

I tow with a FWD Edge. Works great- around 18mpg towing (far better than the 14.5 from the 5.4 F150 or the 15 from the 4.0l Ranger), and it seems to get 22+mpg on the highway w/o.

The truck is rated for 3500lb, so I'm under the rating, brakes are bigger than the Rangers (and close to the F150), better power than the Ranger. (note- most tow ratings have more to do with cooling than power/chassis stregth- the transverse layout makes cooling a PITA).

I don't need a small V8 p.u.

Better yet, the Edge is such a superior car to drive than the old PU's we've had, my wife is willing to part with her beloved 164 LS.

Eric

If you over buy and underutilze you are throwing away money.. period..

thats what it is like with most people and trucks. Its a simple financial decision.

You guys are leaving out one thing. The Ridgeline drives like a Ferrari compared to the POS trucks sold by Ford, GM and Dodge. I had a $35K 2005 F150 Lariat that I put 12K miles on from new and parked that pile in the back yard. It sat there for close to a year after I bought my Ridgeline. I'd drive the Ford once in a while and every time I got in it I realized why it was sitting gathering tree sap.. I eventually traded the 14.5 MPG pig in on a Honda Prelude for my daughter to drive to college.

The Ridgeline tows my 21' car trailer, with MGB, TR7, VW Beetle just fine, thanks. It also pulls my 21' bowrider with its porky Chevy 305 stern drive just fine as well. The Ridgeline has a MUCH more comfortable interior than any Chevy, Ford or Dodge I've been in and it doesn't wallow down the road like a drunk milk cow like the big three trucks either. Granted, my wife's business has some 1 ton and up trucks if I need to haul gravel or the like, but, in all honesty, how often is that? For a truly enjoyable daily driver that can also tow, the Ridgeline cannot be beat.

Hmm, my Liberty (KJ) doesn't have a full frame, doesn't have a V8 and I run close to 4000 lbs towing. I have gotten 14 mpg, but usually runs around 12. Tows nicely, the transmission has never overheated, I tow in OD. My spare tire is readily accessable but is in the way and I have never had to use it in 6 yrs.

Mowog wrote: You guys are leaving out one thing. The Ridgeline drives like a Ferrari compared to the POS trucks sold by Ford, GM and Dodge. I had a $35K 2005 F150 Lariat that I put 12K miles on from new and parked that pile in the back yard. It sat there for close to a year after I bought my Ridgeline. I'd drive the Ford once in a while and every time I got in it I realized why it was sitting gathering tree sap.. I eventually traded the 14.5 MPG pig in on a Honda Prelude for my daughter to drive to college. The Ridgeline tows my 21' car trailer, with MGB, TR7, VW Beetle just fine, thanks. It also pulls my 21' bowrider with its porky Chevy 305 stern drive just fine as well. The Ridgeline has a MUCH more comfortable interior than any Chevy, Ford or Dodge I've been in and it doesn't wallow down the road like a drunk milk cow like the big three trucks either. Granted, my wife's business has some 1 ton and up trucks if I need to haul gravel or the like, but, in all honesty, how often is that? For a truly enjoyable daily driver that can also tow, the Ridgeline cannot be beat.

Ford Edge. See four posts up.

Well, we actually use it as a TRUCK. We haul stuff, we have a couple acres to take care of, so a truck is very handy to have. Considering it gets BETTER fuel economy than anyone's examples to date, why wouldn't you go with one?

Here's the best part, I haven't even gotten the time to "toy" with the mileage yet. Coming soon are an ECU tune for mileage and a better exhaust. Goal is to put it at 25mpg at 80mph cruise. Considering we get 23-24mpg at 75mph I'm not far off.

The Ridgeline is great for the soccer Dads heading to the game and the grocery, but for the rest of us that actually tow it's nice to have a real truck. I've towed with eveything from Jeep Cherokees to 1/2 ton trucks in the past and now have a 1 ton Dodge diesel. It's nice to tow a heavy load and not have white knuckles the whole way.
I don't pick my truck based on how pretty the interior is.....I pick it based on how good it is at being a truck.

Cotton wrote: The Ridgeline is great for the soccer Dads heading to the game and the grocery, but for the rest of us that actually tow it's nice to have a real truck. I've towed with eveything from Jeep Cherokees to 1/2 ton trucks in the past and now have a 1 ton Dodge diesel. It's nice to tow a heavy load and not have white knuckles the whole way. I don't pick my truck based on how pretty the interior is.....I pick it based on how good it is at being a truck.

White knuckels? From what?

You can load a trailer to make a F150 unstable with 3000lb (I had to do it in training- really FUN!!!), and you can load a trailer to make a 4 cyl SWB ranger stable.

We, too, buy on capabilty, but if the choices all have enough capabilty, I will choose the one that has the nicer ride and interior all day, assuming costs are similar (which they were when the F150 lease was up).

E-

Cotton wrote: I don't pick my truck based on how pretty the interior is.....I pick it based on how good it is at being a truck.

Thank you.

Back story on our purchase. . .

I've been around GM trucks my whole life. I know the amount of options and packages they offer are astounding. So when her Suzuki Grand Vitara went from driving 3 miles a day to work and puttin around town to driving 50 miles a day on the interstate, it no longer suited our needs. The old beater I used for towing/work was 17 years old and had 240k miles on it. GM offered 0% financing so we took them up on it. The new CC gets better mileage than the 'Zuk, hauls better than my 89, rides better than either of the other two and had a warranty.

By picking the truck we picked, it is a perfect long distance hauler for us and the dogs, gets great mileage even around town and can doa ll the things we need around home and haul a heavy trailer.

The people who hate on Ridgelines usually do so from the perspective of traditional trucks. Well it's true that it's not much of a truck. It's an SUV with an area where you can put your dirty, smelly E36 M3 without screwing up the interior of your vehicle. Is that so difficult to understand? It's also better handling and more refined than any AWD truck I've been in. For the something like 60 percent of truck owners who rarely use their trucks for their intended function, the Ridgeline makes a lot of sense.

kreb wrote: The people who hate on Ridgelines usually do so from the perspective of traditional trucks. Well it's true that it's not much of a truck. It's an SUV with an area where you can put your dirty, smelly E36 M3 without screwing up the interior of your vehicle. Is that so difficult to understand? It's also better handling and more refined than any AWD truck I've been in. Given that something like 60 percent of truck owners almost never use their trucks for their intended function, the Ridgeline makes a lot of sense.

I absolutely agree. It seems a lot of Ridgeline owners tend to compare it to traditional trucks and try and prove it's far superior in every way, which is what I have a problem with.

Ok, it's great. But it still gets WORSE fuel economy than a standard truck. So why, again, is it "better?"

Actually. . . it tows less, hauls less, has less space and gets worse fuel economy. . . how is it better? Oh, that's right. I forgot the most important part. IMAGE. See, I drive a pair of Hyundai's (auto-x'd one for 2 years) and am building a Suzuki Swift (metro anyone?) as an auto-x'er. Image does nothing for me as I'm not compensating.