Honda Ridgeline shamed by more efficient full-size Chevy pickup

[jamesqf]

Originally Posted by War_Wagon

It's no secret I'm a Honda fan, but at the same time these trucks are just a bad idea ha ha.

I have a real problem with calling them 'trucks'. They're really just oversized sedans with the trunk lid missing :-)

[Hersbird]

4 door el-Camino but they had frames. Subaru Baja is really the closest. Or the guys who chop the back off a minivan an make an open bed.

[War_Wagon]

jamesqf - You are correct sir, a truck is rear wheel drive at the bare minimum. I'd say it has to have a full frame, but there are some decent vehicles I'd consider trucks that have subframe configurations.

Hersbird - I'm not a fan of El Cos or Rancheros, but even those were more truck oriented than the Ridgeline.

The VW Rabbit pickup and the Dodge Rampage were examples of what Honda should have tried to emulate when they decided to make a "truck". If you are going to go smaller, non-tow worthy, front wheel drive style, then go really small and efficient. Like I stated before, an Element based light duty pickup with a 4 cylinder, available 5 speed or awd, would be the bees knees. I'd drive that, it would be perfect for me. Room for car parts etc in the back, good on fuel, and would have a decent sticker price. Though I say Honda "should have" done something, they are the ones making money selling Ridgelines all these years, so I guess they have me beat ha ha.

What small trucks are left in North America? The S10 is long gone, the Ranger is dead, the Dakota got fat, the Comanche is loooong gone (I heart my Comanche!), and as far as Canada goes you can't even get a regular cab Nissan, and a base model Tacoma only in 2wd. So that leaves the Colorado? The sad fact is that car companies make a lot of money off of crew cab 4x4s with sunroofs and leather seats, so they make a lot of them and ditch the cheap little trucks that most people on this site would choose over them. If anything we are likely to see more Ridgeline like products, and end up losing the Colorado (or it will get bigger like the Dakota did) IMO.

[jamesqf]

Originally Posted by War_Wagon

jamesqf - You are correct sir, a truck is rear wheel drive at the bare minimum.

I wouldn't say that, myself. Though I don't know of any examples (maybe the old VW Rabbit pickup?), I think it'd be perfectly possible to make a FWD pickup. Might even be more useful, as getting the drive train out from under the bed might make it more accessible.

No, the real determining factor of whether something qualifies as a truck is the bed: Is it a) significantly bigger than the trunk of an equivalently-sized sedan, and b) is it able to carry a useful load? The Ridgeline, I think, fails on both tests, while other car/truck models, like the original (60s/70s?) Chevy El Camino and Ford Ranchero, do have useful load capacities.

If you are going to go smaller, non-tow worthy, front wheel drive style, then go really small and efficient. Like I stated before, an Element based light duty pickup with a 4 cylinder, available 5 speed or awd, would be the bees knees.

Me too!

What small trucks are left in North America?

Parte of the problem is that anyone who wants a small truck can buy a mid-80s to mid-90s Toyota for a lot less than new, and expect it to run pretty much forever.

[PaleMelanesian]

Errr... I'm no fan of the Ridgeline, but let's not get carried away with tales of its weakness.

The bed is 5 feet long and the standard 4 ft wide. (same as tacoma with 4-door cab)
Payload is 1500 lb. (tacoma 1360)
Towing 5000 lb. (tacoma 3500 or 6500 with towing package)

There's also the "under bed trunk" that holds 8.5 cu ft. Like a truck toolbox but it doesn't eat into the bed space.

[darcane]

Originally Posted by PaleMelanesian

Errr... I'm no fan of the Ridgeline, but let's not get carried away with tales of its weakness.

The bed is 5 feet long and the standard 4 ft wide. (same as tacoma with 4-door cab)
Payload is 1500 lb. (tacoma 1360)
Towing 5000 lb. (tacoma 3500 or 6500 with towing package)

There's also the "under bed trunk" that holds 8.5 cu ft. Like a truck toolbox but it doesn't eat into the bed space.

So, capabilities of a mid-size truck with fuel-economy worse than a full-size?

You just reiterated the whole point of this thread...

[ksa8907]

Gm just needs to bring this to the US and we (me) can be happy.

[darcane]

Originally Posted by ksa8907

Gm just needs to bring this to the US and we (me) can be happy.

You can buy a Maloo in the US.

Right now.

Legally.

Home

Take a deep breath before looking at the price tag...

[Cobb]

Thats what I cant understand. It sounds like the ridgeline isnt that bad except for mpg. Of course I had a tacoma with the v6 and got between 16 and 18. No simple eco mods to fix that. I thought the ridgeline maybe suffering a gearing issue, so some plus size wheel and tires with a aggressive drop may help to bring it up a few?

[redpoint5]

Originally Posted by darcane

So, capabilities of a mid-size truck with fuel-economy worse than a full-size?

You just reiterated the whole point of this thread...

No, Pale was pointing out how people were ridiculously misrepresenting the capabilities of the Ridgeline. There are comments saying that it's less useful than an El Camino.

The El Camino has a smaller bed capacity, a payload rating of 1000 lbs compared with the Ridgeline's 1500 lbs, and has fuel economy that is laughable, even when compared with the Ridgeline's unimpressive numbers. The car is a turd, and there is a reason that the Ridgeline is selling in the year 2014, and the El Camino is not.

There are also comments saying that the Ridgeline is not tow rated. Actually, it has a tow rating of 5,000 lbs; enough to tow a typical sedan on a trailer.

I've seen a Ridgeline hauling two 4-wheelers in the bed along with various gear.

Yes, the truck gets pathetic fuel economy given it's limitations, but it isn't worse than an El Camino, or incapable of towing.