Hoodshaker

Just to add a little fuel to the fire check out a long term test of the Ridgeline. It doesn't seem to be the most reliable "truck" ever built... http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do...ticleId=105797

muckz

I don't remember reading guys making fun of Tacoma. I don't remember guys making fun of Frontier. Both are imports. Perhaps people are not in the "everybody hates imports" camp as much as you have convinced yourself.

And yet the Ridgeline is still not a truck. I don't hear this view on Nissan or Toyota with their compact trucks.


I will use your own illustration to point out the problem.

Both Cadillac and Avalanche are trucks. The Ridgeline is a crossover. The Ridgeline is not a more expensive version of something else. And you don't see GM entering the truck market by simply introducing Escalade EXT as the ONLY truck and advertising that it competes with F250 or 350.

Ridgeline is alright at what it is - a cross over utility vehicle.

Z28Wilson

All 4 struts blown out driving 10-15 mph over a modestly rough dirt road??? That's one tough minivaaaa....errr truck.

Mich84

In one post you manage to represent everything wrong with people lately. Thank you for being a human piece of $hit.

As for the Ridgeline...obviously not too many people are buying into it with the recent production slash.

Threxx

Oh, but they do, just not in this thread (except for a handful of shots taken by Pacer and somebody else I noticed), and not as often seeing as how they're 'real' trucks. But even given that they're real trucks I still hear all sorts of people here ******* on them.



By that school of thought any unibody SUV is not an SUV either. At least the Ridgeline is a 'hybrid car and truck' any way you look at it.




I agree that Honda advertises it as a rougher tougher truck than it really is. No arguement there.

Threxx

Chris 96 WS6, you repeatedly stated the Ridgeline to be torqueless.

Please reference the following power curve (SAE II):

http://earnhardt.com/honda/brochures...e_brochure.pdf
(Page 6)

Over 90% of the Ridgeline's 252 lbs of torque is available at 1500 rpm, with over 95% available by 2500 RPM.

Forget about peaks... the Ridgeline still makes MORE torque than the colorado at the Colorado's peak RPM, and quite a bit more at the Ridgeline's peak rpm.

If this isn't proof that people are perfectly content making generalized assumptions about a car they don't like, I don't know what is.

My GS4 makes 325 lb of torque at 3800 rpm, but 90% of it is made b 1800 rpm. Just another example...

Jason E

I just wanted to mention I have seen 5 Ridgelines now. 4 of them had 22" (roughly) bling on them. None were towing anything, nor were they in Home Depot either. They did have a judicious amount of tire shine on them, I will say that. And no, they weren't all the same truck, either.

I don't know why...I just felt like sharing that

Threxx

I've had about the same experience with Caddy Escalades, but strangely never ever seen a Ridgeline with wheels- come to think of it I hardly ever see them at all around here. But this is Memphis we're talking about... the capital city (or maybe that's ATL... prolly a tie) for the kinda people who would put giant wheels on most any car.

blckbrd84

Threxx, Ridgeline is actually now rated at 247hp 245ft/lbs under the new SAE standards. The 252 ft/lbs is the old standard.

Chris

PacerX

TeeHee.

Forgot to carry a "7" in there somewhere, eh?

Threxx

Weird... saw a couple places saying the 252 ratings was SAEII... but regardless, my previous statement still stands true.

blckbrd84

Maybe. I searched that brochure you posted but I saw nothing on the 90%/95% facts you posted. Personally I'd like to see a dyno myself as I never believe the dyno graphs in brochures (and no, I didn't believe the ones in my GTO or WS.6 book anymore then this one) since they seem more like a graphical illustration of what it probably looks like vs an actual dyno graph.

Those SAEII numbers I pulled off a ridgeline board that were copied there from some advertisement or something. Couldn't find a single dynograph though. Anyone know the SAEII numbers on the Colorado? I'm interested in seeing if that followed the tradition of the other GM vehicles tested and went up a couple ponies and pound feet.

Chris

Threxx

Look at the graph and do the math, if the graph is right then my facts are correct. If it's not then I guess not, but like you I couldn't find a dyno for the Ridgeline anywhere, nor could I find SAE II numbers for the 3500 anywhere, either (or the 4200 or 2800 either for that matter)

MarineReconZ28

I don't think GM tested the colorado under the new test. Something about GM only testing new setups as they come out and not going back to test anything.

blckbrd84

http://www.vtec.net/forums/one-messa...sage_id=379239

That's the post I found the info on.
The graph contains the wrong numbers (255/252) so it's not gonna be accurate. Plus like I said, I never believe the dyno graph posted in the brochures for any make/model.

Chris