Honda Ridgeline Owners Club Forums banner
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ridgeline - 2013, 14 & 15 - the future.

282K views 1K replies 156 participants last post by  csimo 
#1 · (Edited)
I posted a few days ago that I'd post some updates regarding the future of the Ridgeline. I had hoped to get some approval to give out some info, but nothing yet. Here's what I can say and all is just my opinion (and you sure can't find the info anywhere else):

2013 -- The 2013 Ridgeline is currently in production and should show up at dealers within a month. I wanted to post a list of changes, but can't. It's essentially a carryover vehicle... but a few changes include a standard rear view camera on all models, and improved roof structure strength. A few mentions of Bluetooth changes.

2014 - 2015 -- Here's what I can tell you... the redesign for the Ridgeline is APPROVED and under active development despite what any other press source says. The Ridgeline is not discontinued. The R&D guys are working on the 'new' Ridgeline right now. This is NOT the same 'new' Ridgeline that was originally planned for a few years ago (which I described as evolutionary rather than revolutionary). I would not use that same description today. I do not know many details. There have been media reports that the next generation Ridgeline may be based off the CR-V, but I think those reports are in error. Why do I say "2014 - 2015"? Because I expect it to be late. Will it be a late 2014 or early 2015? I don't know. I do not expect the current generation of Ridgeline will be built as a 2014 model year vehicle (2013 is the end)... so there is a possibility that there will not be a 2014 Ridgeline. If I had to make a wild a** guess I'd say we'll see a 2015 Ridgeline around March of 2014. I expect to see a complete new driveline that includes the new Earth Dreams technology and a 6-speed automatic transmission (possibly even a hybrid). No diesel.

In the event there is no 2014 Ridgeline that does not mean the vehicle is discontinued. There will be a next generation Ridgeline but there are timing issues that seem to me will cause delay (only time will tell).
 
See less See more
#365 ·
Understood... Except the RL numbers are 16/21. Had to laugh at your story. My real world experience puts the published RL mpg numbers at or better than published. I've heard a little about the EPAs testing methodology and I'm amazed that my numbers parallel the published numbers as closely as they do. I think your method would provide more accurate comparison numbers, if the mfgs wouldn't build to the test.
 
#368 ·
Yeah. You have probably done a better job choosing vehicles than me. I never get the EPA numbers, much less better. I have almost gotten close a few times. I haven't checked super recently, but I know when I have checked fuelly in the past Chrysler vehicles (especially the ram trucks) never hit close to their EPA mileage. I also don't expect that to change for the new 2013 Ram trucks. I am really happy that they are making improvements and trying out new technology (on pickup trucks anyway) like grille shutters, but i bet there 18/24 or whatever is probably closer to 15/16 city and 22 highway. Still a big improvement, and it incorporates some ideas that hopefully Honda will adopt (if they work well), but still nothing close to what the dumb EPA numbers are.
 
#366 ·
Anybody know if Honda has done much follow-up research on how their truck was received compared to what they intended or thought the original target demographics would be. From my understanding it was originally intended to be a truck for "weekend warriors" (home projects, hauling some stuff, hunting, etc.) with good features for the daily commute and hauling the kids around.

From what I've gathered here, there seems to be a lot of folks who would desire it to lean more towards the truck side (towing and hauling) than toward the family hauler with some truck capabilities.

Did Honda miss their target demographic? Or has it landed where they thought?
 
#367 ·
All I know is they targeted me pretty much dead on. ;)
 
#370 ·
There are occasional times I wish for a larger bed, but that would mean giving up garage-ability or interior space. (Last Saturday it took three trips to transport 27 bags of shredded leaves for composting 2 miles away. I can live with that.) 90+% of the time, the Ridge is spot-on for my wants & needs - far better than any other truck.
 
#373 ·
I always thought that Honda could address this issue well by including a bed extender standard. They went to the effort of making an extra strong tailgate, I really think that they should have advertised that fact quite a bit more, and encouraged people to use a bed extender with it.
 
#384 ·
Well, most don't like change, but with the sales problem this truck has, it has to change to remain viable. Competing with the big boys did not work out. Trying to make a smarter truck did not work out. They need something more cutting edge and revolutionary and not just a few good rethink ideas. IRS was good for ride and handling but not hauling. Swing gate was good, trunk in bed was good. Composite bed was lighter but maybe can't take abuse as well. There are only so many non truck, truck guys. PLUS, UGLY sheetmetal was a love it or hate it, mostly hate it which led to poor sales. Guys want tough and muscular, not bland Accord. No trouble selling RAPTORS at $60k for FORD.

Keep the performance and ride, keep the bed dimensions and length, tighten it up, make it aggressive looking, lighten it a little and get a little more ump with better technololgy and they have a hit. Tweaking this design will mean death to it in the near future. The interior in my RIDGE always seemed huge with the center being way larger than need be.

Just saying, they need to find a better niche, this ain't it.
 
#390 ·
Wonder if Honda will buy a Mazda Diesel Engine - same HP as a 4.0L V8

 
#395 ·
Before the diesel program was cancelled for North America a few years ago I was told that the 4 cylinder (2.2 L at the time) would meet US EPA standards without the need for Diesel Exhaust Fluid.

There are many diesels that don't need the DEF injection. Most are smaller diesel engines (2 L or smaller) but the 6.7 L Cummins in the RAM pickups is the major exception.
 
#394 ·
I don't know about your guys, but for me I think this truck is just fantastic. I know many of you lament that its a aged design, but I still can't get over how useful and comfortable the thing is.

I had a Subaru Forester, then a Prius (shudder, but it was damn good on gas), and now this. I feel like I'm riding on a remarkably powerful cloud when I'm in my truck. People are faulting the noise level and power of this thing - trust me I feel like I went to heaven when I'm sitting in this truck. Some are bashing the interior - its trucky to me but still well executed and I don't have any rattles at all. I love how the sound doesn't buffet when I open the back window. I got the upgraded radio in my RTS, and I think it sounds pretty darn good for being stock.

I can't wait to see how she behaves in inclement weather, but so far? I'm really pleased I bought one, and I don't forsee buyer's remorse when the new one comes out. Plus, I really don't like buying 1st model year runs of anything. I got a 2012 with a birthday stamp of 6/2012. I'm reasonably hopeful most of the TSBs are behind me !!!

Oh, the wife is driving the Prius. Its nice to have a ultra fuel efficient vehicle in the stable when Big Bertha is sucking down the go-go juice !
 
#396 ·
I have both a 2011 Prius and the 2012 Ridgeline. (Formerly had a 2007 Outback before the Prius.) I'm the only driver of both vehicles and have a 90+ mile daily commute. It looks like I'll be putting about 18K miles a year on the Prius and 12K on the Ridge. The Ridgeline is certainly more comfortable and capable, but it has more than twice the fuel cost of the Prius.

A problem arises if I marry my girlfriend and her old Malibu dies. She loves the Prius. Then again, concept drawings and anticipated 60+ MPG of the 2015 Prius look very promising. Also, the Ford C-Max and C-Max Energi look interesting if they prove reliable.
 
#398 ·
Sounds a lot like me. My wife drives about 64 miles round trip and I do about 51. When we move in the spring, it will be closer to my job near the city. She's been looking for a teaching job in PA for a while now and there is a good chance she'll get one this year. However, if that doesn't happen, she's looking at a 110 mile round trip per day to rural Ohio and back. My commute will be about 4 miles. She has her Accord V6 that gets 27-30mpg's regularly, which is much better than the 19-21 I get in my Ridge. Her car has about 135k miles on it right now and we'll need to replace it much sooner than anticipated if she can't find a job in PA.
 
#401 ·
IF they make a 1/2 ton Diesel I will be trading in the RL after it has been out for at least year. I wish Ridgeline had Diesel! The ridgeline is perfect size and all I need and want for my needs as a family truck.
F it!
Those diesel #s sound ok to me. I only have 325 HP and 600 ft lbs at 1600 RPM. might be higher since the cold air intake, exhaust and intake manifold. So if I'm getting 19 in city and up to 24 on highway with only a 4spd tranny. I Hope they can do close to 30 with smaller diesel and better tranny.
IF only 3/4 tons werent SO rough and boucny
 
#402 ·
That 3.0 liter diesel sounds tempting! I'm just so put off by Dodge/Chrysler/Jeep products. It'll be interesting to see if their reliability ratings go up in about three years with the "renaissance" that has occured within the company the last few years.
 
#404 ·
Thanks for sharing your insight, Joe. One thing I would add is that if there is no Ridgeline designated a 2014 model, even if the 2015 model debuts in 2014 then technically a 1-year discontinuation in the model run occurs.

This wouldn't be the first time a manufacturer faced this dilemma though. Back in 1984 Ford had developed a new style Escort that was to be a 1986 model.The planning timeline was implemented faster and tooling ended up being done earlier with the old tooling shelved due to costs. To avoid not having a full calendar 1985 model year (essentially the same as 1984 models) Ford decided to launch the 1986 Escort as a 1985.5 (1/2 year model designation).

Essentially Honda could to the same in 2014, but who wants to deal with 1/2 year model designations???

However, the biggest bad news of your post though is no diesel. I would have bought the diesel version.
 
#405 ·
I was at the dealership yesterday getting a recall fixed on the CR-V; door locks. While roaming the lot and checking out the 2013 RL's a sales guy came up. I told him the only apparent change was the addition of the backup cam. He replied, "only on the RTL with Nav"!! Typical Honda sales person. BTW, the new RL blue is definitely blue!!
 
#406 ·
Ugh. Unfortunately, it's not just Honda salesmen that don't know their products. When I sold, the very first thing I did was grab every book and pamphlet on all of the vehicles. I learned every feature that every model had, how those features worked and how they helped improve the vehicle. It's a tall task to learn all of it, but it certainly can and should be done. That's why it's so important as a consumer to know what you're buying. You certainly aren't going to get great info from salesmen who only care about the signature on the bottom line.
 
#408 ·
That article is from Australia. I don't believe any of those trucks are available or will be available in the US. I wish they were, though. The Amarok, Hilux and global Ranger trucks with the smaller turbo diesels are awesome! The Ausies have all the fun... :act002:
 
#411 ·
Gotcha. I agree with you. The need for tough trucks in Australia is higher due to the rough terrain. I still don't know why the US has been so hesitant to use diesel-powered vehicles. They've come a long way and have proven to be pretty darn good.
 
#412 ·
I traded in my 09 RTL for an 12 Wrangler Sahara last March. But I continue to follow this forum since I'm a big fan of the ridgeline (also previously leased an 06). I noticed some comments relative to the jeep pentastar motors in this thread, and although I have no complaints about the motor in my wrangler, I am not actually able to achieve the same gas mileage in the wrangler as I did with the RL, particularly on the highway. I routinely averaged over 20 mpg in my RL, even with mixed driving... something I rarely see in my (presumably lighter 2 door) wrangler. The jeep is clearly a much different vehicle, so I know I'm comparing apples to oranges...so far mine (with 20k miles) has been maintenance free and it's a blast to drive with the top down. But as an all-around vehicle that does it all well, the RL (even with its dated technology) is second to none, and I certainly miss its capability for the "home depot" trips at times! The RL also handles better (even in the snow where it handles at least as we'll as the jeep), and has a more comfortable ride.
 
#415 ·
I've heard mostly negative about the Colorado, but I had a 1996 S10 with the 4.3 liter V-6 that was one of the best vehicles I have ever owned.
 
#419 ·
Yes, the new Colorado is a Holden product and should be leaps and bounds better than the old model. Holden also designed and built the amazing Pontiac G8 when it was on sale in the US in 2008-09. Alas, it went away here although they still sell the Commodore (same thing) in Australia and the El Camino-esque version - the Ute. I believe they also had a lot to do with the design of the Cruze. As good as Holden is, I just don't like the new Colorado whatsoever. It looks like a Chevy Traverse and a Nissan Frontier had a love child.
 
#417 ·
Style is nice, but I'll take substance over style any day of the week. ;)
 
#420 ·
The bar is going up for fuel efficiency in AWD vehicles. The AWD version of the new Ford Escape is EPA-rated at 30 mpg highway for the base 1.6-liter engine (33 mpg for the FWD version). Meanwhile, Subaru debuts its 2014 AWD Forester this spring with a 2.5-liter boxer engine that's rated at 32 mpg highway. Subaru uses a CVT on the Outback and now the Forester to squeeze out those miles. Most testers seem to be fine with Subaru's Lineartronic CVT, and many drivers aren't even aware that it's different from a standard AT. Still, some driving enthusiasts just don't like the way a CVT performs, and the Subaru CVTs haven't yet stood the test of a decade of hard driving.

Over at Chrysler, the 1.4-liter turbo version of the new FWD Dodge Dart rates 37 mpg highway with a 6-speed dual clutch "automated manual" transmission using premium gas. But Consumer Reports described the dual clutch transmission as stumbling and clunky in normal stop-and-go driving, so it seems the dual clutch technology has much room for improvement.

All of these vehicles are much smaller and lighter than the presumed next generation RL, but the demand for high fuel efficiency is not letting up. What we all wouldn't give for a peek into the Honda design room for the new Ridgeline, eh?
 
#427 ·
No only are they smaller and lighter, but they are powered by real putt putt motors. I wouldn't want something like that. Most of the crossovers with decent V6's are not doing a whole lot better than the RL in real world driving. They may be able to beat it on a solid highway course, but in town driving burns fuel real fast whether you have a 4100 lb crossover or a 4500 lb RL.
 
#421 ·
You're only going to get so good without sacrificing a lot of the characteristics that make the RL a desirable and multifunctional vehicle. Namely size, power, and gearing. I don't need a Subaru Brat.
 
#422 ·
Nor do I. I want a versatile AWD unibody mid-sized truck. I was just making the point that the pressure is on for Honda to significantly (maybe even dramatically) improve the efficiency of a new RL to be sold in 2014/2015. And I wanted to point out that the much-anticipated dual clutch transmission may not be the break-through technology that some were hoping for...yet. My guess is the new RL will get the Earth Dreams engine and 6-sp AT we're seeing in other Honda/Acura models. But who know's what they may be building?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
You have insufficient privileges to reply here.
Top