http://www.automotive.com/future-cars/90/112-0509-honda-ridgeline-v8/index.html

Future: Honda Builds a V-8
The future of engines to come.
By Editors of Motor Trend
Photography by the Manufacturer

Honda is rumored to be testing a new aluminum-block V-8 in the Ridgeline pickup truck. The V-8 is in the 4.2- to 4.4-liter range, with VTEC and cylinder shutoff, and is slated to appear first the next Acura RL, a 2011 model launching in 2010. Honda also is adding the engine to the next-generation Ridgeline, slated for 2011 as a 2012 model. The exact configuration is unknown, but given the displacement, it's not based on the 60-degree 3.5- and 3.8-liter V-6s, so it's probably a 90-degree configuration, typical of eight-cylinder engines. Honda engineers take up the V-8 project as they complete work on a V-6 turbodiesel. It isn't designed just for the European market, which has embraced Honda's 2.2-liter diesel four, but also would provide needed low-end torque for the Ridgeline and Pilot SUV. Low-sulfur fuel required in the U.S. from 2007 will make the engine viable and will launch about the same time as a Mercedes-Benz diesel assault on our market.

Honda also is reportedly working on a hybrid-powered Ridgeline for the 2009 model year.

I'm really curious how accurate this article really is. I have heard that Honda was working on a 6 cylinder diesel, not completing work on a 6 cylinder turbodiesel as the article states.

I was told by a reliable source that a Ridgeline Hybrid was totally out of the question and that there would be no V8 for the RL in the foreseeable future.

You can really kiss your resale value goodbye if any of these engines come to fruition in the near future. No one will want the "underpowered" V6 engined Ridgeline.

PS. The present RL drivetrain will not handle V8 nor a turbodiesel in it's current configuration. An engine/tranny transplant is a tall order in only a couple of years. Anyone got Gary Flint's cell phone number? I'd like to get to the bottom of all of this.

We'll get a firm answer from Gary in St. Louis... else we may not let him leave. :eek: hahahaha

You can really kiss your resale value goodbye if any of these engines come to fruition in the near future. No one will want the "underpowered" V6 engined Ridgeline.



Especially if the mpg's are similar. :(

Oh well... glad I'm not thinking of selling it for a l-o-n-g time! ;)

You can really kiss your resale value goodbye if any of these engines come to fruition in the near future. No one will want the "underpowered" V6 engined Ridgeline.

Just make it your beater for the winter when there is no need for more power........:D

I'm really curious how accurate this article really is. I have heard that Honda was working on a 6 cylinder diesel, not completing work on a 6 cylinder turbodiesel as the article states.



The Honda V-6 diesel is a turbodiesel (I'm not aware of any naturally aspirated diesel engines for automotive use anymore).

The unfortunate truth is that the diesel in not a priority for the Ridgeline. You will see it in the Acura MDX first, then the Pilot, and maybe the Ridgeline sometime after 2011. The're even talking about the Odyssey getting it before the Ridgeline.

The engine is real (and real good). Here are some of the reasons I've heard why the Ridgeline is not a priority:

#1 Limited production. They don't feel there's enough people interested in a diesel Ridgeline.

#2 High cost. The $6000 or so it would add to the price results in the #1 problem above.

#3 Perception. People think that a diesel Ridgeline would compare to a Dodge/Cummins, GM/Duramax, Ford/Powerstroke combo. The V-6 diesel is not a heavy duty diesel and is not intended to increase towing or payload capacity. It's a passenger vehicle engine... not a truck engine.

Please note... I am probably the biggest proponent of a diesel Ridgeline, and if there was something I could say to anybody to change their mind I would do it. I just want to post what I believe to be the real story... and it's not good.

I have no info on the V-8 gasser. It must be beyond 2011 implementation.

No need to bother Gary. I'm sure he couldn't say anything even if he was bursting at the seams to give info. But well ask him anyway in August!

You can really kiss your resale value goodbye if any of these engines come to fruition in the near future. No one will want the "underpowered" V6 engined Ridgeline.

How exactly do you figure that out? Why do you think 2012 model year will be competing with 5-6 years old todays current models? They will have a completely different customer base, IMO, not that I care what the resale value will be in five to six years but anyway...

The Ridgeline resale value isn't that great right now, so we should all just deal with that and move on.

#2 High cost. The $6000 or so it would add to the price results in the #1 problem above.

Why would anyone purchase a vehicle with a $6000 premium for the same power and torque... I would.......A really good designed diesel will produce a 40% increase in fuel efficiency over gas.... Say for giggles the RL average is 19mpg, 40% increase = 7.6 more mpg = an average of 26.6mpg... With gas being around $5/gal in 2012 it would take a couple of years to recoup the $6000 at the rate I put on the miles.....

Why would anyone purchase a vehicle with a $6000 premium for the same power and torque... I would.......A really good designed diesel will produce a 40% increase in fuel efficiency over gas.... Say for giggles the RL average is 19mpg, 40% increase = 7.6 more mpg = an average of 26.6mpg... With gas being around $5/gal in 2012 it would take a couple of years to recoup the $6000 at the rate I put on the miles.....

I would also pay the extra price. The diesel would have less horsepower than the current gasser, but much more torque (and down low where we need it badly).

Diesel powered vehicles also maintain much better resale value. You recover quite a bit of the additional costs on the back end.

I like the improved drivability of a diesel.

The Ridgeline is a niche vehicle. Wouldn't a diesel option be even less attractive from a resale perspective? Wouldn't the average used Ridgeline owner want a gas motor?

I'll have to disagree regarding lack of power - my RL is not THAT underpowered. I drove a 2002 Dodge RAM Quad Cab 4.7 V8 2WD for 4 years and THAT was underpowered, especially at 5,000 pounds.

My RL is pretty snappy (less so than my 06 Tacoma 4 litre V6) and the long term 06 RTL in the JULY Car & Driver now hits 0-60 in 7.8 seconds; .3 seconds faster with 40,000 miles than when it was new. That's hardly horrible.

I'm getting consistent 18.7 to 19.5 in 75/25 hwy/city and I only have 1500 miles. Car & Driver averaged 19 mpg over 40k miles, INCLUDING towing. My Dodge only got 14-14.5 mpg - same driving. RL does pretty darn good in my book. Enjoy your rides:D

It is fun to speculate on what could happen 5 years from now, but get serious, no one from corporate Honda will let anything out that they don't want to. They may tease us or try to get a feel from loyal buyers, but if they have an agenda to fill that is the way it is going to happen.

I've driven the VW diesels and the performance of a 4 cyl is awesome. If I remember right 2.0L with 247ft-lbs and 38 mpg. With that motor it was a screamer. If you put a 6 cylinder diesel in the Ridgeline it would be awesome. I was just talking to my buddy with a Dodge 3500 with the 6cyl diesel. It gets 26mpg on the highway and 18 in the city in a huge truck.

I'll take either one but would prefer the diesel just for the power and durability. Either one of these options the RL will match it's accelation with it handling.

The Honda V-6 diesel is a turbodiesel (I'm not aware of any naturally aspirated diesel engines for automotive use anymore).

The unfortunate truth is that the diesel in not a priority for the Ridgeline. You will see it in the Acura MDX first, then the Pilot, and maybe the Ridgeline sometime after 2011. The're even talking about the Odyssey getting it before the Ridgeline.

The engine is real (and real good). Here are some of the reasons I've heard why the Ridgeline is not a priority:

#1 Limited production. They don't feel there's enough people interested in a diesel Ridgeline.

#2 High cost. The $6000 or so it would add to the price results in the #1 problem above.

#3 Perception. People think that a diesel Ridgeline would compare to a Dodge/Cummins, GM/Duramax, Ford/Powerstroke combo. The V-6 diesel is not a heavy duty diesel and is not intended to increase towing or payload capacity. It's a passenger vehicle engine... not a truck engine.

Please note... I am probably the biggest proponent of a diesel Ridgeline, and if there was something I could say to anybody to change their mind I would do it. I just want to post what I believe to be the real story... and it's not good.

I have no info on the V-8 gasser. It must be beyond 2011 implementation.

No need to bother Gary. I'm sure he couldn't say anything even if he was bursting at the seams to give info. But well ask him anyway in August!

Lots of good points here. I wasn't aware that the new diesel would in fact be a turbodiesel.


How exactly do you figure that out? Why do you think 2012 model year will be competing with 5-6 years old todays current models? They will have a completely different customer base, IMO, not that I care what the resale value will be in five to six years but anyway...


The article mentions that the says the following in regards to the launch of the new diesel engine.

"It isn't designed just for the European market, which has embraced Honda's 2.2-liter diesel four, but also would provide needed low-end torque for the Ridgeline and Pilot SUV. Low-sulfur fuel required in the U.S. from 2007 will make the engine viable and will launch about the same time as a Mercedes-Benz diesel assault on our market."

Correct me if I'm wrong but the "Mercedes-Benz diesel assault on our market" is supposed to start next year with the 2009 models. I know that Mercedes is already launching a new diesel M class SUV. If the time line for the diesel launch corresponds to the Mercedes timeline like the article states, you may see a 2009 diesel RL. If you bought in the last month, your RL wouldn't be quite 18 months old when the RTL-D's hit the showroom floor. :eek:

PS. I'd spend the extra money on the diesel too. I think that with gas prices going the way they are, no one will buy a vehicle that gets less than 26 mpg on the highway.

I was just talking to my buddy with a Dodge 3500 with the 6cyl diesel. It gets 26mpg on the highway and 18 in the city in a huge truck.

I think he is grossly exaggerating his mileage. He might be gettin 20 mpg on the highway with a tailwind.

I think he is grossly exaggerating his mileage. He might be gettin 20 mpg on the highway with a tailwind.My father's '99 Dodge Diesel 6 speed manual gets 21 highway with no towing... but he drives like an old lady :eek: With towing... forget it! ... maybe 12 mpg

The Ridgeline resale value isn't that great right now, so we should all just deal with that and move on.

resale on my 06 RTL is 27,490. MSRP was about 33,000. Is that bad? I think it's pretty good. It's down relative to my 07 Fit about the same as the Fit.

Retail in excellent condition with under 20K miles, maybe. But you'll never see that. Trade-in with realistic mileage is closer to $20K-$21K.

A vender in the Marsyvillie area of Ohio is working with Honda on a huge transmission plant. The transmission are for the RL and Pilot. He tried to get me a reject part from a RL but they said no all rejects get sent back. He said there changing over a few lines there for a different transmission for RL and Pilot.
Just what I know from around here.

Let's just hope Honda continues to make the Ridgeline. Selling less than 50,000 units a year isn't too impressive.

I've had my RL for a year now and I like it even more now than a year ago. But I'm (and you) are in the minority.

Let's just hope Honda continues to make the Ridgeline. Selling less than 50,000 units a year isn't too impressive.

I've had my RL for a year now and I like it even more now than a year ago. But I'm (and you) are in the minority.

I have had my truck for over a month now and I am seeing that changing. When I started talking about the truck at work a few months ago when I started my researchm, people were asking me what kind of vehicle it was. Now I pull into our parking garage and folks I don;t know walk up and ask me "Hey how do you like that Ridgeline?"

Maybe they are on the verge of a selling spree.

Just an observation...

Most people are followers. People like Ridgeline owners are trend setters or leaders for other consumers. The Ridgeline is different and I think first time buyers of a different product like the Ridgeline have a different psychology than the typical follower in the market place. I don't know anyone that has a Ridgeline that doesn't think it's practically the best thing since sliced bread. Followers are scared of "different" and will wait until the trend setters tell them it's okay to buy it. Once more and more are on the road, the followers ..ummm will follow. People are funny that way.

Gas prices are also a factor. Even a superior full size truck like the new Tundra is putting incentives out there for consumers to buy it.

The price is also a factor cited in many articles. It's not that people don't want it, it's that they can't afford it or feel it's too expensive for a truck. It comes in only one configuration (crew cab, short bed, V6). Other trucks come in many other configurations. You really have to compare the Ridgeline sales to other brands in the same configuration to get an accurate sales picture of how it sits in relation to other trucks. Ridgeline sales are quite good.

Now I pull into our parking garage and folks I don;t know walk up and ask me "Hey how do you like that Ridgeline?"
My Ridgeline is 14 months old and I've been asked that same question at least twice a month. Usually I don't know what the person is driving when I'm asked but the funniest time was when a new F150 owner asked to see everything. As I'm giving him the sales pitch you can see his buyers remorse kicking in. He was in awe of a lot of the RL features. Eventually he said, "It sure would have been a lot easier to convince the wife to buy this truck". He then went on to say that the F150 was more truck than he actually needed, that a truck such as the RL would have made a better choice, more pleasing to his wife and just enough truck to satisfy him.

As is, the RL suits my needs. I'm satisfied with the 6 cylinder and the low torque. I don't need, nor want a V8. It gets me where I need to go fast enough and in the comfort this old tired body requires. I'd consider diesel, but not for more umph.

I think he is grossly exaggerating his mileage. He might be gettin 20 mpg on the highway with a tailwind.

His is not a DRW and it was a long highway trip. If I remember right he's got a huge exhaust on the thing. He's not really the type to exaggerate and was very supprized when I told him I was only getting 17.5 mixed MPG

In any case, with gas going where it's heading some OEM better be thinking of making a truck that gets great gas mileage. Many hard core Dodge, GM etc big 4-wheel drive full size truck owners are parking their trucks and driving their wife's car to work now-a-days.

People will always have a need for a truck, and people will start looking for a truck that gets the best gas mileage that can still function as a truck. There will be exceptions for people that need to haul large loads or pull heavy loads, but a high percentage of people out there have a truck because it has a bed in it so they can easily put their flowers in it after visiting Lowe's on a Saturday afternoon.

The Ridge is very close to that need. very close. So to some degree the Ridge might very close to blossoming in sales. If the Ridge just got a tad better fuel mileage, it would be hot right now! Real hot.

I say, bring on the V8.

Power and mileage are not always opposing goals. My wife's new Pilot gets worse gas mileage than my Grand Cherokee V8 H.O. (High Output version). This engine has 320ft-lbs of torque too.

http://www.wjjeeps.com/ho_engine.htm
http://www.wjjeeps.com/engine.htm

I regularly get 17MPG around town with my Jeep - and I have a lead foot. The kicker is that I usually have to use premium gas. It's recommended for the H.O. engine. The stereo knock sensors in the engine will dial back advance with lower octane gas and I notice the seat of the pants change - especially when towing. I'm curious if RL owners get better mileage with premium gas.

I'm glad to see the rumor mill suggests continued investment in a vehicle like the Ridgeline. It's still on my short list of choices for my new car purchase this fall.

People have suggested 50K is not a lot of units. That number is comparable to the number of police cruisers sold every year (according to a recent Car & Driver article reviewing the Crown Vic, Charger, and I think an Impala or Malibu.. can't recall). Sure seems like there are enough police cruisers around :-)

Good luck with your RL's

p.s. I really enjoy reading the ROC as a potential buyer - the forums are very active.. You guys may enjoy looking at www.wjjeeps.com as another example of an excellent resource for a vehicle owner. Over the years, I really have enjoyed the database-like approach for OEM part numbers, options, color schemes, specs, badging, TSB's etc... that www.wjjeeps.com organizes. It must have taken the site founder countless hours to put that together.

I traded my Jeep Liberty CRD (diesel) for the Ridgeline, I loved the diesel concept but the reliibilty was an issue for me, 3 torque convertors, several EGR valves and poor dealer service. But, the power and economy were awesome, 28-30 MPG from a 2.8 liter 4 cyl. with a 5000 lb towing capicity. I can't wait for a Honda diesel, I'll buy one.

I traded my Jeep Liberty CRD (diesel) for the Ridgeline, I loved the diesel concept but the reliibilty was an issue for me, 3 torque convertors, several EGR valves and poor dealer service. But, the power and economy were awesome, 28-30 MPG from a 2.8 liter 4 cyl. with a 5000 lb towing capicity. I can't wait for a Honda diesel, I'll buy one.

Unfortunately the Liberty diesel is a pretty crude implementation. I would not consider it as a good representation of a modern diesel engine.

One of the few diesel powered vehicles I would not consider.

Autoblog says (http://trends.autoblog.com/2007/06/04/honda-accord-says-no-to-hybrid-yes-to-diesel/) it will be a V6 diesel in the RL in 2009.

I just got mine yesterday...... Bummer. V8 power was all the RL lacked in my decision making process.

Autoblog says (http://trends.autoblog.com/2007/06/04/honda-accord-says-no-to-hybrid-yes-to-diesel/) it will be a V6 diesel in the RL in 2009.

I can pretty much (99.995%) assure you that the Ridgeline will not get a diesel engine for 2009.

I can pretty much (99.995%) assure you that the Ridgeline will not get a diesel engine for 2009.

When do you see a major change in the RL's powerplant? 2011? Why do you say that it won't happen sooner?

When do you see a major change in the RL's powerplant? 2011? Why do you say that it won't happen sooner?

I can say with nearly as much certainty that there will be a powerplant change for 2011. V-8 or diesel? I don't expect either, but we'll see a diesel before a V-8.

Keep in mind that 2011 is not that far off in automotive design terms. The 2008 Ridgeline is already under production. The 2009 design is wrapped up. 2010 is a carryover of 2009. They're well into the 2011 design already.

There have to be other powertrain changes before we see an engine upgrade. The VTM-4 system is near the limits of it's torque rating with the current engine. The SH-AWD system is capable of higher torque ratings, but is considered too expensive for the Ridgeline. All I hear is that Honda is considering "other options" so you can read whatever you want into that.

Honda does have a 3.7 V-6 but that's not a drop in solution. The current 3.5 liter has enough low end torque problems... the 3.7 is worse in that respect (makes its power at higher RPM's). A truck needs an engine that can produce torque at low RPM's. Honda does not currently have a solution to this issue.

V-8 - several years off. Honda is much further along with V-6 gasoline and diesel development than a V-8 gasser.

3.7 liter V-6 - as I understand it the bore is as big as they can go on the existing block design. This leaves only the stroke and tuning to work with. It's slightly more undersquare (bore/stroke ratio) than the current 3.5 liter so I don't know how much stroke they have to work with. I think we'll see a variant of this engine in the 2011 Ridgeline.

V-6 turbodiesel - great solution for the Ridgeline, but Honda seems to want to put it in the Acura MDX first, then Honda Pilot, and then Odyssey. Talk of the Ridgeline hits resistance and things such as too high of cost for limited production are mentioned. I don't agree.

That's my opinion based on whisps of information and rumor. It's probably worth exactly what it cost you... nothing. Time will tell for sure.

3.7 liter V-6 - as I understand it the bore is a big as they can go on the existing block design. This leaves only the stroke and tuning to work with. It's slightly more undersquare (bore/stroke ratio) than the current 3.5 liter so I don't know how much stroke they have to work with. I think we'll see a variant of this engine in the 2011 Ridgeline.

A stroker would be great. If the torque increase was significant, could they add VCM?

A stroker would be great. If the torque increase was significant, could they add VCM?

Keep in mind that Honda is a green company. When you increase the stroke you create more friction. More heat, less fuel economy.

VCM has enjoyed limited success to date. I'm not a fan of VCM so I would prefer to leave it out (that friction thing mentioned above is a big negative factor for VCM).

All the damn thing needs is an I6 turbo diesel. I really wish honda would see that, the truck would be darn close to perfect.

All the damn thing needs is an I6 turbo diesel. I really wish honda would see that, the truck would be darn close to perfect.

A straight 6 wont work with the current transmission configuration. It's too long for transverse mounting. I think that it would have to be a V6 or a V8.

I'd give up the lower center dash section for an I-6 diesel.

Oh yes, that inline diesel would be great. But as the poster above made abundantly clear ... it just won't fit. Just look under the hood of the current V6. Only a scant few inches remain. And I mean few.

I know Honda's engineering gremlins should never be underestimated. But, to use an inline 6 cylinder engine would nearly double the width (length*transverse) of the block. Maybe it would fit if the front wheels could be left out, and / or use some huge front fender bulges.

We may be better off just stickin' with the V.

There are many vehicles with a transverse six cylinder engine, and the Ridgline is one of the widest vehicles on the road. The trick is the positioning of the transmission, which is usually placed parallel to, and alongside the engine. Tough engineering isn't exactly something that Honda shy away from, so I wouldn't be too sure of your conclusions.

No doubt Honda "could" do it. I do not put the possibility past them. But, the benefits of an I would be heavily outweighed by the benefits of a V IMO. Therefore, I am confident that we will never see such an arrangement, and it's little more than a dream.

Don't loose heart... Something will be here within a year or two, dezel or V8, but i think it will be dezel. If the cost of gas was not important, than I believe that a V8 would be the choice. Why? Well what are they running on the formula One circuit, they are all Honda engines. But we have a sever or
an overly promotted gas scare, and it will be a deizel, I think...:eek:

Honda has two diesel engines under development. The first is an I-4 engine that may make it to US cars for 2009.

The engine that may make it into the Ridgeline is a V-6 configuration.

I'd bet that V-6 diesel won't make it into a Ridgeline or equivalent by 2009. 2010, maybe. Just idle speculation, 'cause I'm a betting man. :)

I'd bet that V-6 diesel won't make it into a Ridgeline or equivalent by 2009. 2010, maybe. Just idle speculation, 'cause I'm a betting man. :)

That would be a very safe bet!

The very earliest would be 2011, but I'm told that it won't happen for the Ridgeline then.

The Acura MDX will probably get the V-6 diesel in 2011. Possibly the Pilot shortly thereafter. Next is supposed to be the Odyssey.

The Ridgeline is the vehicle that could really use the diesel, but apparently Honda is still up in the air on the issue. The Ridgeline may not get the diesel at all... or at least for quite a few years.

Hope things change. FAST.

I hope the reason the other vehicles get it first isn't because Honda is putting a fork in the Ridgeline. More idle speculation.

Wow - is this interesting. You'd think you were all at a design review. Some of the posts have varying degrees of layout understanding.

Just to clarify: an I6 nor a V-8 will not fit in the current transverse layout. V-8 is going to require a FR platform - unless you are willing to live with the turning radius of a 747.

Kodiak, what is a FR platform? Do you mean Front-Rear, as in longitudinal, i.e. conventional American pickup tranny behind the engine?

The Ridgeline's platform was always meant to be a 4 vehicle platform (Odyssey, Pilot, MDX and Ridgeline). It stands to reason that the next gen will also be a 4 vehicle platform. Sharing the drivetrain, 4WD systems, control systems and basic architecture with it's platform-mates. What makes the Ridgeline economically feasible is that the MDX, Odyssey and Pilot sell very well, this allows for a relatively large margin for the Ridgeline to be profitable.

So it stands to reason that the next gen Ridgy will have to be on the same platform with the next gen Pilot, MDX, and Odyssey. A stand alone platform or power train is just too expensive for the low numbers of the Ridgy to be economically viable.

So for the next gen Ridgy's powertrain just look at the next gen MDX, Pilot or Ody.

Just my $0.02, $0.0096 after taxes.

Hondafred.

Powertrain platform, yes. Chassis platform, no way.

Yes it is true, the Ridgeline shares a chassis platform with it's Pilot/MDX/Odyssey cousins. However 93% of the chassis is unique to the Ridgeline.

Fred.

As measure of security I always lease ( 36 moths) a new model vehicle just in case it turns out to have problems or a weak resale value. Then at the time of lease end I have the option to return it, buy it or return it for the new current model. By then they would've fixed all the problems or imperfections with the vehicle. I have 06 RTL lease in March 06 that has 20k miles and am still very satisfied with its versatility, comfort and interior space. However, low end power is very weak(my last truck was a Tundra v8) and it should be addressed. The turbo diesel would be appealing to me for mileage, torque and longevity of engine life provided it was quiet like the Mercedes. The v8 unless it had similar fuel economy would not interest me.
Just my humble opinion

Are we assuming that a Ridgeline diesel would be a "truck diesel" engine with loads of low end torque? It's just as reasonable to assume that Honda might opt for a "passenger car diesel" that would have decent torque but basically just run on cheaper fuel, isn't it?

Yes it is true, the Ridgeline shares a chassis platform with it's Pilot/MDX/Odyssey cousins. However 93% of the chassis is unique to the Ridgeline.

Fred.

Hahaha, that's like saying my Chimay Trappiste ale shares it's recipe with Budweiser, because they're both 93% water.

The Ridgeline has a unique chassis that has nothing to do with the MDX, Odyssey or Pilot.

Good call on the Beer! Cheers!

The parts will not interchange nor are the part numbers the same, but the basic engineering was shared throughout the platform. The whiz kids at Honda engineering designed this and other platforms to be very flexible!! Believe it or not, the CR-V is derived from the Civic.

Raise a pint for me!!
Fred

Good call on the Beer! Cheers!

Raise a pint for me!!


It comes in PINTS?

On draft, yes.

Otherwise, just buy the 16 ounce cans.

FR = Front Engine - Rear Wheel Drive

Longitudinal layout instead of transverse. Yes - this is the typical layout of most trucks.

Kodiak, what is a FR platform? Do you mean Front-Rear, as in longitudinal, i.e. conventional American pickup tranny behind the engine?

Well, maybe they don't come in pints, but "Raise a Pint" sounds better than "Raise a 330cl" :)

Otherwise, just buy the 16 ounce cans.

Chimay comes in 16 ounce cans? I feel faint...:)

V8 power.... i'm all for it
I'm sure my friends would still refer to it as "the wagon" :(

Posts like this one make me glad I did the "Leadership Purchase Plan" which is Honda Financial's terminology for what GM calls a "Smart Buy." Drive this truck for 3 years and put on 45k miles then just turn it in and walk away at the end or trade it in on a new vehicle if they will allow a trade value for the baloon payment. I got tired of having to deal with a vehicle that was worth less than what I owed when I wanted to trade out into a new vehicle. This way they take the risk of that not me. If these predictions here are true and the next latest greatest Ridgeline makes my truck go down in value I just walk away at the end of the 3 years. I guess you can tell I am not the kind of guy that keeps vehicels forever. I much prefer to drive something new all the time.

The 2.2 deisel is already in the CR-V, civicm accord, and mini van over seas. It is running in at 160 or 165 hp and 240 or so tq. What would make you think they would put a deisel V6 in a mini van that will surely have 300-350 flbs of tq. I do think it will be in the MDX and Ridgeline at first and then find its way into others. I would guess it will be around a 3.0-3.5L deisel putting out 250hp and 300-350 tq. It will get a 5 to 7 speed tranny and will get 25 mpg plus high ... i would guess closer to 30mpg highway. You can have then same base engine for a deisel and very easily make one a high rpm horsepower high and the other and very low its all how they tune it. also diesels are low revving engine so dont be shocked if it has a redline of 5k or less.

Second a friend of mine has a 2005 dodge 2500 and gets an avg of 23. MY sisters bf has a chevy 2500 and he gets 21 for an avg so 26 high ways is very doable and i have even seen the dodge get 20 avg on a 300mile road tripe pulling about 9000lbs to a car show. My evo and a Type R in a closed trailer doing like 67-72 mph.

I would love to see it come sooner. Also bio diesel is become a hot topic and we will surely see alot on gas stations having it along with E85.

Wow - is this interesting. You'd think you were all at a design review. Some of the posts have varying degrees of layout understanding.

Just to clarify: an I6 nor a V-8 will not fit in the current transverse layout. V-8 is going to require a FR platform - unless you are willing to live with the turning radius of a 747.


The Caddy and Olds Aurora have had a transverse V8 for years, and they are narrower than the Ridge, so don't say it "will not fit".

The Caddy and Olds Aurora have had a transverse V8 for years, and they are narrower than the Ridge, so don't say it "will not fit".These cars that you mention are also RWD cars, not FWD/4WD. There is a world of difference in the hardware required between these two layouts. Sure, you can move the engine up "out of the way" of those components, now you just made the truck's handling go out the window additionally now the truck has to be taller to mount and have clearance at the hood.

how far am I off? (non-mechanical engineer here)

These cars that you mention are also RWD cars, not FWD/4WD. There is a world of difference in the hardware required between these two layouts. Sure, you can move the engine up "out of the way" of those components, now you just made the truck's handling go out the window additionally now the truck has to be taller to mount and have clearance at the hood.

how far am I off? (non-mechanical engineer here)

07 Cadillac DTS is Front Wheel Drive, transversally mounted V-8 engine.

Autoweek article has the following statement.

"Ridgeline: The mid-sized truck has not sold well but may be in a sweet spot because of new CAFE requirements. A V-6 diesel will be available when it is redesigned for the 2011 model year."

See the entire text at:

http://www.autoweek.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070823/FREE/70822002/1528/newsletter01

So I have to until 2011 for the Ridgeline 2.0 - man...:(

The Caddy and Olds Aurora have had a transverse V8 for years, and they are narrower than the Ridge, so don't say it "will not fit".

and where are you going to fit the exhaust manifolds, in the cab ? 4 inches less ground clearance to clear the suframe?

there is alot more to the total space requirements than just the width of the cylinder heads.

While it would be bitchin to see someone totally ruin the point of a ridgeline to put one in and have a fwd truck I'd imagine the novelty would wear off as the bills to do it acrued.

There are other more cost effective way's to make v8 power

The Cadillac is narrower and has 225mm wide tires. A V8 will not fit in the Ridgeline.

Open the hood an look at the clearance between the engine and the side frames. There is less than 15mm clearance. How do you plan on adding another cylinder bank?? Increasing the width another 100mm??

What would that do the gas mileage (remember it is CDA that affects drag - the A=frontal area).

I wonder if Honda would consider a new engine configuration for the Ridgeline given it's engine width limitations? If you have V6 space but want V8 power, why not build a W9? (3 rows of 3 cylinders.) Now you can have your cake and eat it too! :)

http://www.atomracing.se/W9/W9_engine_2.jpg

I know that this is a way uber exotic example but Honda is an engine company. If they can do a fuel cell, why not a W9?

I wonder if Honda would consider a new engine configuration for the Ridgeline given it's engine width limitations? If you have V6 space but want V8 power, why not build a W9? (3 rows of 3 cylinders.) Now you can have your cake and eat it too! :)

I know that this is a way uber exotic example but Honda is an engine company. If they can do a fuel cell, why not a W9?

There are two new engines in development for the Ridgeline. One gas (3.7L V-6) and one diesel (3.0L V-6 turbo direct-injected). No V-8 or W-9 that I know of.

To be perfectly honest the Ridgeline does not have high enough production numbers to justify a new engine dedicated to the platform. The Ridgeline has to share what's available... with slight modifications of course.

From what I heard they're working pretty hard on making the 3.7L V-6 produce significantly higher low end torque for the Ridgeline. The overall torque numbers won't be much higher than the current 3.7L V-6 due to overall powertrain limitations.

If there's a V-8 in development it's quite a few years away. The plus side to this is that the new V-6 turbodiesel puts out more torque than a V-8 gasoline engine and Honda is working on powertrain options to handle the diesel's torque. Even if Honda had a V-8 right now they don't have a powertrain system that would handle the extra power. The diesel development opens up the possibility for higher power future engine development.

There are two new engines in development for the Ridgeline. One gas (3.7L V-6) and one diesel (3.0L V-6 turbo direct-injected). No V-8 or W-9 that I know of.

To be perfectly honest the Ridgeline does not have high enough production numbers to justify a new engine dedicated to the platform. The Ridgeline has to share what's available... with slight modifications of course.

I know. :( I just got to daydreaming and wondered if there was such a thing as a W9 and googled it up and there it was. I think that it would be a pretty neat engine though.

Honda might be able to justify it if they could put it in the MDX, Ridgeline and the Oddysey. Reality tells me that a W9 configuration is going in the opposite direction of where Honda wants to go right now. :(

As a side note, I think that you could pull some folks over from the dark side (the Big 3) if they opted for a motor with more cylinders. Alas, as you mentioned, you still need a suitable drivetrain.

Joe, care to take a stab at what the towing capacity will be with these new engines?

Joe, care to take a stab at what the towing capacity will be with these new engines?

The diesel engine under development is not a heavy duty engine... it's a passenger vehicle diesel so we can't compare this to a Duramax, Cummins, or PowerStroke.

I would expect that the tow capacity may go up slightly... I would not expect to see over 6,000 lb. towing capacity, but at this point in time it's just a shot in the dark.

I would expect that the tow capacity may go up slightly... I would not expect to see over 6,000 lb. towing capacity, but at this point in time it's just a shot in the dark.

To me an extra 1000lbs in towing would be a lot... I know trailers at this level must have their own breaking system, but would the RL come with larger rotors or 6 piston calipers?

To me an extra 1000lbs in towing would be a lot... I know trailers at this level must have their own breaking system, but would the RL come with larger rotors or 6 piston calipers?

I have no idea what changes, if any might be made to the braking system.

Keep in mind that Honda requires any trailer over 1000 lb. to have a working trailer brake system.

The plus side to this is that the new V-6 turbodiesel puts out more torque than a V-8 gasoline engine and Honda is working on powertrain options to handle the diesel's torque. The diesel development opens up the possibility for higher power future engine development.

Sounds like a win-win to me.:D

Wow - is this interesting. You'd think you were all at a design review. Some of the posts have varying degrees of layout understanding.

Just to clarify: an I6 nor a V-8 will not fit in the current transverse layout. V-8 is going to require a FR platform - unless you are willing to live with the turning radius of a 747.

No FR for me, thank you. What next, a beam axle and leaf springs?:eek: Engine upgrade (3.7 or TDI) among other improvements will be required to put me in a new RL. Otherwise ol 'Blue is just starting to loosen up a little.:D

Autoweek article has the following statement.

"Ridgeline: The mid-sized truck has not sold well but may be in a sweet spot because of new CAFE requirements. A V-6 diesel will be available when it is redesigned for the 2011 model year."

See the entire text at:

http://www.autoweek.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070823/FREE/70822002/1528/newsletter01

Interesting the new accord 3.5 has 360 hp! Sounds like the ridge could easily be beefed up with present power plant?

Interesting the new accord 3.5 has 360 hp! Sounds like the ridge could easily be beefed up with present power plant?

I think you're off by nearly 100HP.

I think you're off by nearly 100HP.

I am :o typo shoulda been 260 but you get the idea still more than the ridge! Improvement possibilities!

I am :o typo shoulda been 260 but you get the idea still more than the ridge! Improvement possibilities!

True...but from what I've read, the torque of the config. on the Ridgeline's engine suits the RL better.....I'm wondering if honda could enact cylinder deactivation on the RL to help with mileage?:confused:

True...but from what I've read, the torque of the config. on the Ridgeline's engine suits the RL better.....I'm wondering if honda could enact cylinder deactivation on the RL to help with mileage?:confused:

If my memory serves me correctly, the RL isn't aero dynamic enough for cylinder deactivation.

If my memory serves me correctly, the RL isn't aero dynamic enough for cylinder deactivation.

That makes sense.....I was just thinking now that GM is doing it with their trucks...then again...that's a 5.3 L V-8

It doesn't have enough torque for VCM.

It doesn't have enough torque for VCM.

I think the VCM comes on the van. The only differene is the amount of air it is pushing.:D

The Odyssey won't tow 5,000 pounds.

Big difference.

The Odyssey won't tow 5,000 pounds.

Big difference.

Could that be because the Ody doesn't produce the same torque as the RL? This discussion is going in a circle.

Although I'm a RL fan, I think it's arguable that a RL can tow 5,000 lb. Yes, it can pull 5,000 lb without blowing the tranny, but the mpg starts looking like a Ford Super Duty pulling 10,000 lb...

I'd love to see them drop something like the VW TDI V10 engine in it. 310hp and 553 ft-lbs of torque. I'm sure this would be impractical/impossible given the configuration of the RL and the current engine lineup, but man, wouldn't that be awsome?

-craigger.

I'd love to see them drop something like the VW TDI V10 engine in it. 310hp and 553 ft-lbs of torque. I'm sure this would be impractical/impossible given the configuration of the RL and the current engine lineup, but man, wouldn't that be awsome?

-craigger.

Not that this would ever happen, but that VW V-10 TDI engine is fairly compact. I don't know that it would fit in a Ridgeline, and even if it physically fit the suspension and drivetrain is not anywhere near what would be needed for such an engine.

An interesting concept... I would like to see it, but the chances are about as close to zero as you can get.

Not that this would ever happen, but that VW V-10 TDI engine is fairly compact. I don't know that it would fit in a Ridgeline, and even if it physically fit the suspension and drivetrain is not anywhere near what would be needed for such an engine.

An interesting concept... I would like to see it, but the chances are about as close to zero as you can get.

Still sounds nice though

and at 69k starting price, a bit stiff for v10 tdi heck the v8 starts at 49 and the v6 280hp starts at 39 no nav, i was quoted 42 minus ttl, v6 with lux pgk and nav.:p

There are two new engines in development for the Ridgeline. One gas (3.7L V-6) and one diesel (3.0L V-6 turbo direct-injected). No V-8 or W-9 that I know of.

To be perfectly honest the Ridgeline does not have high enough production numbers to justify a new engine dedicated to the platform. The Ridgeline has to share what's available... with slight modifications of course.

From what I heard they're working pretty hard on making the 3.7L V-6 produce significantly higher low end torque for the Ridgeline. The overall torque numbers won't be much higher than the current 3.7L V-6 due to overall powertrain limitations.

If there's a V-8 in development it's quite a few years away. The plus side to this is that the new V-6 turbodiesel puts out more torque than a V-8 gasoline engine and Honda is working on powertrain options to handle the diesel's torque. Even if Honda had a V-8 right now they don't have a powertrain system that would handle the extra power. The diesel development opens up the possibility for higher power future engine development.

Hey Joe,

I just read in the Autoweek article that says the Diesel engine won't be released until around the 2011 model year when the Ridgeline gets a complete makeover... does that sound about right?

Also, do you know anything about the release date of the 3.7 V6 engine that you mentioned is being developed? Will that be out for the 09 Mid-Model Change which I've heard maybe released in Feb / March of 08 next year?

Any and all info you can provide is appreciated!

Thanks in advance!

Hey Joe,

I just read in the Autoweek article that says the Diesel engine won't be released until around the 2011 model year when the Ridgeline gets a complete makeover... does that sound about right?

Also, do you know anything about the release date of the 3.7 V6 engine that you mentioned is being developed? Will that be out for the 09 Mid-Model Change which I've heard maybe released in Feb / March of 08 next year?

Any and all info you can provide is appreciated!

Thanks in advance!

The diesel will not be out before 2011 for the Ridgeline. I'm kind of doubting it will even be 2011. I'm hearing that the 2011 Ridgeline redesign is being pushed back to 2012.

Honda is very tight lipped about the 3.7L V-6 gasoline engine for the Ridgeline. They don't want people to not buy now in anticipation of changes next year. The bottom line is that mid 2009 model year makes sense, but I've got no information that will verify that.

Stay tuned.

If they don't do something by 2010 model year, which is when I'll be looking to change, then Honda will lose me as a customer and won't get any further consideration for at least another three years.

can't state it any more plainly than that ...

btw, I get 10mpg towing an enclosed trailer at the 10,000# total combined limit running 75 - 80 mph ....

If they don't do something by 2010 model year, which is when I'll be looking to change, then Honda will lose me as a customer and won't get any further consideration for at least another three years.

can't state it any more plainly than that ...

btw, I get 10mpg towing an enclosed trailer at the 10,000# total combined limit running 75 - 80 mph ....

They've needed a V8 for years. I'm a little surprised they never came out with one. I understand they're not as big as Toyota and only have so much R&D money, but still.

Something tells me...

...the number of cylinders is being compared to the number of inches.

Need I say more?

:D

Something tells me...

...the number of cylinders is being compared to the number of inches.

Need I say more?

:D
Is that why GM stuck a 5 cylinder in their midsize trucks...:D