Ridgeline - 2013, 14 & 15 - the future.

[wa2be]

Originally Posted by phillyguy

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.

There's a LOT of facts they could have advertised a bit more. That in my opinion is the primary reason this truck hasn't sold the way it should have.

I agree on the bed extender issue. I made a custom one for my truck that maintains the full width of the bed all the way out to the end of the tailgate, unlike the factory one that is narrower than the rest of the bed. Makes no sense to me. I love having a full-width bed that is 6.5 feet long with the tailgate down. Came in really handy when we recently moved to a new house.

[phillyguy]

Originally Posted by wa2be

There's a LOT of facts they could have advertised a bit more. That in my opinion is the primary reason this truck hasn't sold the way it should have.

I agree on the bed extender issue. I made a custom one for my truck that maintains the full width of the bed all the way out to the end of the tailgate, unlike the factory one that is narrower than the rest of the bed. Makes no sense to me. I love having a full-width bed that is 6.5 feet long with the tailgate down. Came in really handy when we recently moved to a new house.

I am glad that you brought that up since I forgot to include it in my post. With a stronger than normal tailgate Honda should have designed a custom bed extender for the RL. There is no reason they needed to use the "standard" type of truck bed extender with it. Standard bed extenders, while useful, are not nearly as useful as what you describe, and what would have been nice to see Honda design for the RL.

[S1njin]

Originally Posted by phillyguy

I am glad that you brought that up since I forgot to include it in my post. With a stronger than normal tailgate Honda should have designed a custom bed extender for the RL. There is no reason they needed to use the "standard" type of truck bed extender with it. Standard bed extenders, while useful, are not nearly as useful as what you describe, and what would have been nice to see Honda design for the RL.

Isn't this it?

http://automobiles.honda.com/ridgeli...ory=RIDGE13016

[dboz]

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.

[Rockwood]

Originally Posted by Ledebuhr1

The new RL will have to get MUCH better MPG than the current model. The 2013 Ram v-6 has over 300hp and it gets 25mpg. I know GM and Ford have new trucks in the works and they will have even higher MPG.

Hate to break it to everyone, but all the Ram/jeep/etc brands with v6 and more will have very short 2013my. 2014 will be arriving next spring with 8 and 9 speed boxes good for 1-2 more mpg.

But let's see what Honda drops into the MDX which gets updated for 2014 and see what mpg improvements come with Earth Dreams technologies.




Sent from my iPhone using AutoGuide.com App

[Ledebuhr1]

I thought that the 2013 Ram already comes with a 8-speed.

[bikerbudmatt]

Originally Posted by xd9x19

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?

Nope, they landed a bullseye on me.

[bikerbudmatt]

Originally Posted by phillyguy

…I think that I got banned from a forum once for pointing out that the only worthwhile way to test fuel economy would be to put a lot of vehicles on a long track at the same time, and just drive them around and around. Moderator was an engineer and did not like this and insisted that EPA ratings were perfectly accurate, despite OVERWHELMING empirical evidence to the contrary.

Sounds like a "good" banning. In the sense you get a medal for it.

Love engineers, the world needs engineers. But, straight-line thinking can lead to intolerance of other viewpoints.

[phillyguy]

Originally Posted by bikerbudmatt

Sounds like a "good" banning. In the sense you get a medal for it.

Love engineers, the world needs engineers. But, straight-line thinking can lead to intolerance of other viewpoints.

It is what it is. I am a scientist by profession, and on more than one occasion I have gotten into arguments with engineers about things like this. When experimenting scientists always try to control for variables, while engineers always try to fix the variables. That sounds pedantic but is a very important distinction. In the case of the EPA numbers the engineer likes the controlled EPA tests that are done on dynos and "factor in" aerodynamics and whatever other conditions they can. He liked this despite overwhelming emperical evidence that 1.) the numbers for many vehicles are not even remotely close to their EPA estimates, which would actually be ok if they could be used as a good basis for comparison but for 2.) manufacturers *must* game the system because some hit or always come close to their EPA numbers while some never do, even for the same class of vehicles.

While obviously not a practical solution (and it was not being presented as such) I pointed out that the only way to really know what the "true" mileage a vehicle could obtain would be to lay out a veeeeeeeeery long test track, get multiple vehicles from multiple manufacturers (say 10 RL's, 10 F150s, etc.), and run them at the same time. Over the duration of the test weather and environmental conditions should be controlled for, road conditions should be controlled for, and while I would have to actually check the statistics to figure out the appropriate sample size, vehicle to vehicle differences should be controlled.

Again, I am well aware that this is not a reasonable test to impose on automakers, but that wasn't the discussion, the discussion was are the EPA numbers bad and if so what would result in more accurate mileage numbers. I also pointed out that minimally the EPA should alter their dyno testing to actually resemble true city and highway driving, while it wouldn't be perfect I would guess that this change would result in "good enough" numbers that nobody would really care much. But apparently that was stupid too. Oh well. Win some lose some.

[larryr]

Wonder if Honda will buy a Mazda Diesel Engine - same HP as a 4.0L V8

You Tube

You Tube