Ridgeline is your tow-rig pick?

YOU ARE ALL WRONG, THE BEST TOW RIG EVER IS:

FROM: http://forum.merkurclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=5629&postdays=0&postorder=asc&highlight=xr4ti+tow&start=15

TO DENY IS HERRASY!

Thread complete, you may all stop reading now...

Damn, he's got us there.

wreckerboy wrote: And in the Suddard household the most important definition of a truck's working ability is it's ability to carry patio blocks.

why can't people learn to not...upset... margie

I know its blasphemy but sometimes it is good to downsize the fleet. Had a track miata, RX8, 1989 Mazda B2200 and harbor freight trailer along with the wife's Mazda 6 wagon. Now I am down to a 2006 Tundra doublecab, track miata and the wife's Mazda 6. The Tundra gets the same mileage as the RX8 on my commute, 18mpg. I drive roughly 30 miles per day going back and forth to work. Oh.. and I am WAY more comfortable using the Tundra to tow my car to the track than I was using my track miata to tow my tires and tools to the track.

If gas goes high enough I will pick up another beater but really I was getting 18 out of the RX8 so nothing has changed other than I can now tow my car to the track. My insurance and tag costs have plummeted along with my car payment. I am not a truck person (this is my first REAL truck) and I hate having to drive it everyday (treehugging liberal) however I do use it and it has been extremely useful to have around.

Oh, and I bought it used and it is 2WD because 4WD is overkill in Ohio for what I need. The bonus is better mileage and cheaper to buy because everybody needs 4WD here. Also consider that my wife gets 20mpg on her, admittedly much slower, stop and go commute in the 6 wagon.

PS: It drives like crap and I miss my 8 terribly...

My towing vehicles of choice for almost everything:

1996-1998 Chev/GM 1/2 ton with 5.7L vortec 1995-1998 Chev/GM 1/2 ton or 3/4 ton with turbo diesel

I recently had the pleasure of being in a 1995 turbo diesel regular cab long box 2wd GMC towing a WRX (above 3k), a 1500 pound trailer (I am being nice, an 18 foot steel trailer probably much heavier), plus 12 tires/rims and a huge toolbox in the back of the box (all in all above 6000 pounds). That thing was incredible, and knocked down 18mpg to boot all day long. Not much hp (215 IIRC) but the later ones have over 400ft/pnds of torque!

What a bunch of girls. Buy a real truck and stay grassroots. 1965 simplicity. 8 foot bed for real hauling (that's a lot of patio bricks). Inexpensive to buy, cheap to insure, and doesn't depreciate! No new resources used to build something that will be in a junkyard in 15 years. Gets 15 mpg in regular use. Best of all, chicks dig it.

ddavidv wrote: What a bunch of girls. Buy a real truck and stay grassroots. 1965 simplicity. 8 foot bed for real hauling (that's a lot of patio bricks). Inexpensive to buy, cheap to insure, and doesn't depreciate! No new resources used to build something that will be in a junkyard in 15 years. Gets 15 mpg in regular use. Best of all, chicks dig it.

and I just saw http://charleston.craigslist.org/cto/866199417.html

hmmm.... no no no nonononooonononoon have baby on way.. must resist

The only people I've seen hate on ridgelines are people who have never driven one. I'll admit I didnt like them at first but after spending a few months driving my dad's everyday I loved it. Granted it's not the truck you would use to tow a huge trailer but it's enough for the average person.

I drove that truck six hours through a huge snowstorm in western PA last year. I saw a whole lot of lifted american duallies sitting on the side of the road stuck with their hazards on. I didnt get stuck once, and as a matter of fact the only other truck that could even keep up with my ridgeline in that weather was a nissan. so think twice before calling it a "girl's" truck. you might get passed by one on a snowy day!

I have a 06 Frontier crew cab and i will never trade down to a ridgeline.

its 2wd V6 and auto, pulls anything i ask and 0 issue, the factory tow package comes prewired for trailer brakes just plug in a controler and your good to go, disk brakes on all 4 corners, plus it has the highest towing capacity in class. I towed my Jeep from Long Island to central PA threw traffic and some nasty back road hills, got 14mpg and could move the trailer (and stop it) on the highway at the speed limit and still had power to spare, and i can get to my spare tire when the bed is loaded with tools. If you dont need a full sized truck but still need a tow rig I'd recommend the frontier hands down, with the toyota tacoma a close second.

Honda never intended the Ridgline to compete with mainstream full sized trucks. As they've done many times, they designed a vehicle to fill a niche not very well filled by others. Honda rarely follows the pack, and sometime they hit a home run and sometimes they tank, but they ALWAYS do it their way, and I have a lot of respect for a company like that. Don't blame the Ridgeline, blame everyone, owners and non-owners, that incorrectly continue to compare it with full frame, V-8 powered trucks. Does anyone really believe that Honda couldn't have built a truck like that if they had chosen to? Like any time you buy a vehicle, you need to buy the vehicle that best suits your needs. In this case, the Ridgeline fits the bill for Tim. The mistake most people here are making is that everyone else has the same needs as them.

I wish they made a ridgeline with more truck and less car, the crewcab for me is a waste of valuable bed space, and I love the "trunk" in the ridgeline, and Honda dependability trumps GM everytime

and FWIW, I bought my 04 silverado Z71 extended cab new, sticker was like 33k I paid about 27K, domestic's have a lot more fat in the sticker, my previous Nissans had half as much negotiation room in their price

I got about 13 mpg city hauling, on the highway I got about 17 mpg, towing on the hihgway I got about 13mpg at about 80 mph, 2000 lb trailer, 3000 lbs of car and spares

since someone else mentioned the frontier, my old 99 frontier SE-V6 4x4, got about 17 mpg city hauling, but only about 19 mpg highway, and towing a similar load ont he same trailer, got me only 11 mpg! I loved the truck but needed the full size bed for hauling lumber, cabinets, drywall etc, GM could learn a thing or 2 about truck spring rates form Nissan

I didn't read this whole post but I have to say this. The Honda is UGLY and that counts for a lot in my book. Now, I"m not talking unattractive, I'm talking fugly here folks. Now, what do I tow with. An unattractive Dodge with the Cummins. I get 22 MPG unloaded and got 19 mpg with over 10,000 lbs behind it. I got it for what you will pay in 9 months on that you pay for your ugly-mobile not including the higher insurance.

DrBoost wrote: I didn't read this whole post but I have to say this. The Honda is UGLY and that counts for a lot in my book. Now, I"m not talking unattractive, I'm talking fugly here folks. Now, what do I tow with. An unattractive Dodge with the Cummins. I get 22 MPG unloaded and got 19 mpg with over 10,000 lbs behind it. I got it for what you will pay in 9 months on that you pay for your ugly-mobile not including the higher insurance.

diesel is more expensive then gas though........ but then again, i wouldnt be afraid to dent an olld chevy or dodge, i think older trucks make better tow rigs because they are tossable, not handling wise but dent and " i dont care if these rocks scratch up my bed and cab" kinda way.

diesel is more exspensive, but throw in an after market adjustable chip and a 3/4 ton will get the milage of a 4cyl small truck and when you running un loaded, flip a switch and you have 400+trq for most any hauling needs. Yes this has a higher buy in and such, but nothing is across the board perfect.

as a weird aside...

why don't we get the brazillian F250 with the cummins 3.9 4 banger in it.. 250 horse and 400 lb-ft of torque and nearly 30 mpg....

WHY!

That's easy. It's the same reason Ford management sat on the Euro Ford line for the last 10 years and gave us an antiquated Focus:

so appropriate.

ignorant wrote: as a weird aside... why don't we get the brazillian F250 with the cummins 3.9 4 banger in it.. 250 horse and 400 lb-ft of torque and nearly 30 mpg.... WHY!

Ford likely sees the Cummins brand as Dodge territory in the US and would hate to be looked at as someone who had to copy a 5th rate truck manufacturer...

I think it would be a great idea.

Yeah, Ridgelines suck. Towing your Tiger 800 miles to Kentucky in complete comfort at 78 mph, with the stereo and the nav system humming away while getting 12 mpg (20mpg, when not towing 4000 pounds) totally blows.

Which I had a rough riding, gas hog, hard to park F350.

Funny stuff.

Your nav system hums?

;)

ignorant wrote: as a weird aside... why don't we get the brazillian F250 with the cummins 3.9 4 banger in it.. 250 horse and 400 lb-ft of torque and nearly 30 mpg.... WHY!

doesn't dodge have exclusivity to cummins in light/medium duty trucks?

there was a baby powerstroke that was supposed to happen, but i heard somewhere they couldn't make it meet nvh requirements, so its been relegated to light duty box trucks.

ignorant wrote: as a weird aside... why don't we get the brazillian F250 with the cummins 3.9 4 banger in it.. 250 horse and 400 lb-ft of torque and nearly 30 mpg.... WHY!

Do we really need a brazillian more F-250s on the road.

cummins isb is available in the f450-550-650..

I know the main reason, the engine is not emissions compliant.

also.. look to the "chrysler" bond to be broken by a japanese brand.. the info is already out on the net.