Yup. CRV is available in Fwd or AWD.

Ridgeline is the same in that respect, but its only available in AWD. It's a Fwd platform with AWD.

 

Weird? I mean, if it works, it works, but it just seems "different" to me, to have a "FWD" (based) truck!

 

Ridgeline is completely worthless to me. I'd like to try to pull a 200 bushell wagon full of corn with it...

Avalanche on the other hand -

 

I think Threxx mostly makes good points with regards to the Ridgeline in that the average suburbanite truck buyer could probably get away with one and still not have too many of their "truck needs" go unfulfilled.

My problems stem from the fact that it is ugly (in my opinion) and if I was going to actually buy a truck it would be to perform duties that my car could not. Another serious complaint I have is that the spare is in one of the tupperware compartments in the bed instead of under the car/truck.

 

I unfortunately got dragged for a ride in one of these ridgelines the other day. I guess the interior is comfortable enough, as it should be because it is A CAR, but I smashed my head on the roof getting in because it is NOT A TRUCK, and putting it to the wood made me want to get out and run past it on foot. I dont see it ever going away bc of the wanna-be truck driver market it fills, but I thought it was pretty terrible as a truck.

 

Regarding acceleration from what I recall it out-accelerates the I5 Colorado and most other competitors except maybe the Dakota V8 and Tacoma V6?

 

I'm so sick of this damn truck. Is it a fullsize? Is it a midsize/compact? Is it a truck or a car?
It never ends with this thing.

 

If you compare the dimensions it is significantly closer in size to the Colorado/Canyon than it is to the Avalanch that so many people compare it to. It's probably one of the largest if not the largest of the compact trucks. Though it seems Honda tries to market it as a full size sometimes... probably just for image.

 

So wouldn't it be a midsize? Like the Dakota/Frontier?

 

Yeah that's about its size... wasn't aware that the Dak/Front were considered to be a different size class but that makes sense.

 

Its bed is actually just about the same size as the Avalanche's bed, with the midgate up..

Interestingly, the payload is at least the same as the Av, if not more.. The Av is like 1200 lbs total, no matter where it is.... vs the RL's 1500 lb, but 400 of it has to be in the cabin..

Av is definantly bigger than the Rl exterior wise.. For interior space, its easily noticable in shoulder and hip room...

 

Yeah, I meant exterior dimensions. And it's funny you mention that as there was a thread here a while back where people were making fun of a quad not fitting in the back of the RL with the tailgate up. After pulling out some real 'interesting' specs on the domestic competition and the fact that many other compact, mid sized, and even full sized SB QC trucks wouldn't be able to put the tail gate up either, everybody got real quiet and then just focused on the Ridgeline supposedly having too much suspension squat under load.

 

I don't recall anybody being quiet about it. I distinctly remember posting a comment mentioning that you were comparing it to the smallest of the three available bed sizes of the Colorado; meaning a potential Colorado owner would at least have the option of hauling something larger if they needed that capability.
I don't want to go down this road again. We'll let the Ridgeline's sales speak for it's success/failure.

 

I like how it beat all the Hummers in the Baja

Like Capn Pete said, I'd like to here the whole story, not one side.

 

Too bad it still looks like an Avalanche.