Honda Ridgeline Owners Club Forums banner

Ridgeline - Tough Enough? Bad gravel roads, severe climate.

18K views 95 replies 37 participants last post by  IanRTL 
#1 ·
Hello out there from the frozen wastelands of Alberta, Canada...am trying to decide if the Ridgeline is right truck for me..Is it tough enough seems the deal breaker.

I work in the oil industry and drive about 30-35,000 miles a year in all kinds of conditions and on all kinds of roads, a lot of them bad.

probably close to 1/2 my driving is on gravel/dirt roads and pretty poor ones at that - lots of washboard, holes etc. Am always in a hurry, so tend to pound down these roads at 60 mph plus a lot of the time.

My local mechanic is telling me that the Ridge is just not heavy duty enough to take the pounding.

Says I should go Ford or Chev - I really don't want to do that, but perhaps I must. Mechanic thinks front end and suspension and who knows what are just too lightly built for the pounding.

Was hoping for better gas mileage, better reliability and all the rest of the good things a Ridge promises. Cost to drive is a biggie, so depreciation also is big issue.

Am driving an 02 Silverado 1500 LT 4x4 now - nice truck with low miles, but is coming a little unglued after ony 6 months out here (was a garage kept city truck before) and is gonna cost me a few thousand soon if I keep it - plus fuel economy is not nice.

I don't haul heavy loads, or tow much if ever, and rarely tackle serious mudbogging type roads - just a lot of gravel pounding. I do get stuck in mud or snow on occasion, but really try not to and usually wait for a tow rather than hammer my truck. Usually.

Another factor is I work in a rural area, with no Honda dealer for long ways - and very thin pickins for good mechanics at all. So reliability is a large issue - it's a main reason lots of guys in my industry out here buy a new truck - they keep it while it has warranty (about 2 years) then get another one. I was hoping to avoid the massive depreciation of this plan - but downtime is just not an option.

Thinking used Ridge with say 80,000 miles or less.

Am considering a Ford Ecoboost - but price and depreciation are a bummer on a new one, and used I don't trust the reliability - plus used is still pricey.

Maybe a Tacoma is tough enough? Tundra probably would be, but V8 gas mileage likely not going to satisfy.

I'm a big Honda/Toyota fan, although most of my experience has been with older models. Have a "new" 02 CRV which is great highway car, but not even close to cutting it on my work roads. Wife's 97 Rav4 does a little better.

I'm convinced I'd enjoy the Ridge - but will it stand up?

I'd consider upgrading the shocks/struts if that'd make the difference.

Thanks for your time and considerations
 
See less See more
#4 ·
The pounding of bad (and frozen) unpaved roads takes a toll on the suspension that can probably only be really addressed by going to a 3/4 ton pickup. The pounding also leads to interior trim squeaks and rattles, which are going to happen in any truck.

That said, I'd probably consider a Tundra for your use, but not the Ridge.
 
#5 ·
Thing is, his current Chevy is coming apart... and with low miles (whatever that means) to boot. So how does that recommendation from the mechanic to go Ford or Chevy improve his options?

If the OP is a DIYer, he could get the fluids, etc. and stock them for his own use. But the question is whether or not the RL would take the constant pounding.

I have no idea, but I'll bet it can't be more worse than what he currently has.
 
#7 ·
From Alberta as well. As the previous replys have said, look elsewhere. I fear the Ridgeline is just not up to an oilfield pounding. This is unfortunate as it handles rutted and banged up gravel roads better than any vehicle that I have had before. It just doesn't feel like it would endure that abuse on a constant basis. The lack of skid plates will allow the "gravel" to pound your underside bits.

If it were me I would look at a low spec Tacoma. The narrower track of the Tacoma will allow you to stay out of the wider ruts that you will experience. My old 4Runner was nearly unstoppable on lease roads.

Good luck
 
#8 ·
The Ridgeline is best used as a light duty truck for urban use. I use mine also for deer hunting and travel some really bad roads. And after the season is over, there is always something to be fixed. Last year is was a torn shaft boot and the splash guard behind the front bumper.

As far as Ford and Chevy goes, never had a Ford but owned three Chevy trucks and drove them well over $100K doing nothing but fluid and tire changes with some pretty heavy abuse. Some of my friends own the Fords and report similar experiences.
 
#9 ·
I have a 06 ridgeline and i bought it brand new. Im very hard on things and i tend to push them to the limits and beyond. I drive mine over 120 miles a day from the mountains( pot holes, bad roads, gravel, dirt, snow ect.) i put the 2" tuxx lift on it for extra ground clearance and left the stock wheels and tires on it. Handles great everyday, everywhere. I tow with it and go beyond the rated pay load. Its never let me down. Ive even been in a rear end crash where i wasnt moving and was hit at 55! It only bent the tow hitch and exhaust tip. Not saying thats a reason to go with it. But ive owned fords and chevy's andthey have spent alot of time for repairs and suspension. The only reason i relaced all my struts is because i did the lift and it had 100k on the motor so why not. Hope all this helps. Hood luck with. What ever you end up with.
 
#12 ·
Depending on what you really need to haul, I'd be looking at a Jeep Wrangler too. It'd be up to the task of rough roads and they hold their value if you trade every couple years. Even the lower trim models have some beefy skid plates, axles and other components meant for continuous off road use. OTOH, there's probably some guy using a '91 Cavalier with 300K on the clock in the same conditions and doing fine. Lol.
 
#13 ·
The Ridgeline will undoubtedly offer the best overall reliability, driver control at speed under adverse conditions. You can get aftermarket skid plates. I would not put any stock in the OP's mechanic's advice about the Ridgeline because we have too much experience here on the ROC with people who don't really know anything about it, but profess to give an answer anyway. However, the best that we can say for full-time prolonged use here is that it's unknown -- there just aren't many people who subject a Ridgeline to this use and report back. There are plenty of weekend warriors who are very happy, but that's not the same as using it as a work truck. While the Ridgeline is a "conservatively" built "heavy-half-ton" truck, I don't think that it's the conservative choice for this application.

Plus, we have to recognise that even the best truck under these conditions is going to need service due to the extra wear and tear. If the OP can't do it all personally, the accessibility of knowledgeable mechanical service is going to be a big factor.

I can offer some feedback from people in the forestry industry, as of 5-10 years ago. I have family who spent years in the interior of British Columbia and who counted many lumberjacks as friends. Those folks pretty much all bought from Big 3 manufacturers, and among Ford/GMC/Dodge, the consensus was firmly and overwhelmingly in favour of Ford. The deal-breakers against Dodge were numerous with overall reliability suffering, while GMC had more specific problems with front-end durability and fuel pump failure.

So, that experience favours Ford. As for the rest of the world, it's Toyota all the way. Specifically for truck selection, the Toyota Landcruiser is the SUV and the Hilux is the truck of choice. The Tacoma is not built as tough as Hilux, but it's closest that you'll get in a compact truck here. If you want some idea of toughness, check out the Top Gear videos where they try to kill a Hilux, here here and here.

My advice to the OP in order to be conservative is to:
  1. Make Toyota and Ford the short-listed manufacturers.
  2. Go onto forums with owners who have similarly severe usage for their trucks. Find out what selections of drivetrains and other relevant things (such as suspension packages) are working best. Some worthwhile modifications might be aftermarket. This gives a short list of models and options.
  3. Also find out what parts on even those short-listed choices will need replacement and how often. Find out where to order those parts at lowest cost (genuine OEM, not knock-offs unless they really are better). Do some cost-of-ownership estimates.
  4. After deciding on a purchase, order a supply of those will-need-replacement parts. It's much easier to find a mechanic than to find a mechanic AND parts when you are in a rural area.

Toyota models will probably depreciate less than Ford models. The Tacoma has engine choices that will give better fuel efficiency, too. If the OP plans to ever haul heavy cargo though, recent models of Ford have much stronger frames when it comes to vertical input.

Good luck with the truck shopping!
 
#30 ·
So, that experience favours Ford. As for the rest of the world, it's Toyota all the way. Specifically for truck selection, the Toyota Landcruiser is the SUV and the Hilux is the truck of choice. The Tacoma is not built as tough as Hilux, but it's closest that you'll get in a compact truck here. If you want some idea of toughness, check out the Top Gear videos where they try to kill a Hilux, here here and here.


You beat me to it!! I was going to post this same video. The Toyota Hilux is basically the European version for the Toyota Tacoma. If you don't wish to or can live with having a smaller truck (think better maneuverability, MPGs!), then the Tacoma is actually a pretty good option for you IMO. While it's not the full size some are suggesting, it does a great job taking a beating.
 
#14 ·
Dang it Ian, you beat me to it.

If you abuse a truck like you're talking about then expect a similar response in the money you spend fixing it. No truck is made to do 60-70 miles an hour down dirt and gravel roads on a regular basis, not even a Raptor or the new Baja Tacoma. Regardless of how well maintained a road like that is you can't run highway speeds on it. That is crazy.

Buy yourself an old late 90s stroker for a beater and put some MTs on it. Any half way respectable mechanic will be able to work on it inside and out and parts are fairly cheap. Ian's Toyota option is a good one also. If it was me I would rather have the old Ford, but the Hilux is a good one to if you can find it in a diesel.

The fact of the matter is that cars and trucks are not made as strong as they use to be. What you are talking about is so far outside a modern trucks realm it is kind of crazy. Everything today is going lighter and more efficient. The more progress is made in that direction means less durability and simplicity.
 
#15 ·
Personally...I would say buy a used RL, beat the crap out of it for 6 months, and report back...I would love to see how a RL would hold up in the oil fields of Alaska. Might be a great commercial opportunity...! :act018:
 
#16 ·
Get the Tacoma Baja, beat the crap out of it for 6 months, and report back!

I would stay away from the big 3 at those speeds, you will be spending a lot of $$$ on suspension repairs, guarantee it!
 
#17 · (Edited)
Hi ...“the OP”... here again

Thanks to all for advice and thoughtful response

A lot of you are saying - no, not tough enough

We shall see if I listen to that advice – maybe, but maybe not -

Some comments/updates:

• Can’t afford a Raptor so that’s a no go. The idea here is to reduce costs to drive - fuel, repairs, lower depreciation.

• Need a full double door cab 4x4 – extra cab not quite doing it for me.

• Looking at 3 trucks really – fuel economy being the common denominator. Ford F150 Ecoboost, RL (with leather and roof), and Tacoma (probably TRD). Prices for new ones within 5% of each other.

• I agree that a ¾ ton would handle the rough roads better – but again too much money to buy and operate.

• I may have overstated my case as to how bad the roads are – about ½ the time they’re in good shape and pretty smooth – even granny goes 50 mph on them – farmer granny that is. City granny will go 30. But the other ½ time you’re dealing with significant washboard, frozen snow, or rain/mud blasted out potholes.

• One reason to consider a RL is looking for a nice ride (another reason no ¾ ton). I spend a lot of time in my truck – driving or sitting. Creature comforts are important.

• Truck will become my personal vehicle as well – which means some long distance driving, plus packing family and grandkids around on occasion.

• The locals that do my kind of work or similar or farming drive over 90% Big 3 trucks. Tundras are rare, Tacomas and Ridgelines more so. I am seeing more large SUV’s on the road – farmer’s wives and ladies mostly, and even a few minivans and small front wheel cars. In the old days the full size rear drive Detroit car was the weapon of choice and they handled these roads just fine.

• Good advice to stock up on fluids and spare parts.

• I/we do basic DIY work (fluids, brakes) – have a heated shop and a pit. But don’t have time or skills for more serious work.

• Absolutely concur with comments that all trucks these days are lightly built and all will squeak and rattle on these roads. I grew up on these same roads in the 60’s and 70’s (yes I’m old) – and the trucks we had then were way more solid. Even my 91 Chev K1500 ext cab was way more solid than my current 02 and newer.

• Part of my cost justification is that it would seem that a Tacoma or a RL will depreciate less than a Ford F150 ecoboost.

• May decide to buy a 2nd “beater” truck as backup – as some of you have suggested. Takes the pressure off the “no downtime” job requirement, and makes a used truck more viable.

• The local Honda dealer service foreman says he thinks the RL will take it. Knows of a few customers using them for my exact work or similar, in same conditions. One guy is on his 3rd RL. Service guy may be prejudiced, but not like a salesman – I hope.

• Yesterday I looked at a RL at the dealer (no test drive), and test drove a Tacomoa TRD. I liked how the TRD drove – felt very solid and strong. If it feels even close to this good after 2 or 3 years on gravel, it would be very impressive. Will it? My wife’s 97 Rav4 has stood up remarkably (coming up on 300,000 miles) – but I rather doubt Toyota builds anything that well any longer, hope I’m wrong? I didn’t like the Tac for small cab (I pack a lot of stuff and pretty much live in my truck), and also found the quality of the interior to be cheesy - reminded me of the Kia Rondo I owned for a couple months – and that’s not a complement.

• Will be driving a RL tomorrow probably – and I expect to prefer it, for many of the reasons expressed on this forum. Though I must say the Tac feels tough – it could indeed be tougher than a RL, pretty sure more so than a Ford F150 Ecoboost.

• Only one engine available to me in Tacoma – 4.0 V6. I need double cab 4x4 and up here the 2.7 four is not available in these. I actually really enjoy a good 4, so am disappointed that it’s not going to happen.

• Is 60-70 mph on gravel crazy? Send me the certificate please. Maybe I am indeed crazy for thinking a new truck will take it like the old ones used to. I can live with tinny body and squeaks and rattles, so long as the truck holds together...but maybe that isn't reality. I also may have overstated my case – I probably normally drive 50-60, and not 70 very often. And if roads are truly ugly that day, I slow down. Maybe my gravel is nicer than your gravel? Maybe it’s acause I grew up on these roads and spent just a little time on them since I was 12?

Actually - I fear I must take seriously the multiple advices that 60-70 is "abuse" and no modern truck will take it. Really? I want it to not be true - but perhaps it is.

Lets see, the manufacture's spend big money advertising how tough and work-ready their trucks are - and you have to baby them at like 40 mph if you're not on pavement?

I am reluctantly prepared to slow down if absolutely necessary - as I need my trucks to last.

Maybe another reason to buy new and sell when warranty expires - which is actually pretty common out here.

Maybe driving large truck also messed me up - 50-60 mph on gravel no issues.


Thanks again for all the input

…will keep in touch with updates, if that interests anyone
 
#26 ·
• I may have overstated my case as to how bad the roads are – about ½ the time they’re in good shape and pretty smooth – even granny goes 50 mph on them – farmer granny that is. City granny will go 30. But the other ½ time you’re dealing with significant washboard, frozen snow, or rain/mud blasted out potholes.

• One reason to consider a RL is looking for a nice ride (another reason no ¾ ton). I spend a lot of time in my truck – driving or sitting. Creature comforts are important.
Bottom line any vehicle will be fine on gravel roads, it's the potholes that will kill "all vehicles" eventually, regardless!

The RL is a fine vehicle, and very car like comfort compared to a heavier duty truck. It's all relative!

Good luck
 
#18 ·
Had an 07 Ridge for 5 years. I live on a short stretch of rough gravel road and drove on it every day leaving and returning to house. The Honda felt as tight and squeak free when I got rid of it as it did the day I bought it. For what it is worth, replaced the Ridge with a new 1500 Z71 Chevy, a year old now it it is squeaking, rattling, and has a clunky transmission. Cant wait to see how it is 5 years in, OH wait, I will get rid of it before that, LOL. All I can say is that I regret getting rid of the Honda and good luck with any of the "BIG"3, cause that is what it boils down to... Luck
 
#19 · (Edited)
Hi, Bluesmobile. Thanks for the clarification. Your update does make it sound like the Ridgeline should still be a contender.

If you test drive a Tacoma (especially the TRD) and the Ridgeline on the same day on those bumpy roads, you are very likely to just discount the Tacoma. Your spine and kidneys will inform you. It's an oft-repeated story here regarding truck shopping.

Please check the tire pressure of both trucks before test driving them. Some have sky-high pressure when waiting on the lot to guard against minor leaks. That can produce a stiff ride.

Also, if you do get to test drive different trucks on the same bumpy roads, take careful note of the handling around tight curves (with bumps) too. The Ridgeline has independent rear suspension and essentially AWD. Most of the others have solid rear axles and are using either RWD or 4WD with no center differential. In those adverse conditions at speed, it's like comparing an AWD rally car to a high-powered go-cart.

Oddly, Tacoma does not have a full-time 4WD option, but the mechanically similar 4Runner does. After switching from an older 4Runner (part-time 4WD) to the Ridgeline, I have no desire to go back to a part-time 4WD system for on-road use.

As for the Ridgeline's "what breaks first", it's usually the rear stabiliser link, which is a very simple and inexpensive part that you can probably replace yourself. You might even fabricate your own.
 
#20 ·
Thanks for the updates, guys..

Tire pressures on test drives...good point, one which I never thought of

Ian, your comments on the 4 wheel drive system is helpful....I know there's some differences, but it's good to get some "real world" feedback.

Am getting used to pressing buttons to "shift on the fly" on my 02 Chevy, but can't say I like much..and am unsure of how durable the system is using 4 Hi at highway speeds, plus gas mileage takes a dive..so i tend to nurse it along in 2 wheel drive until roads get ugly, then push the button to 4 hi...not ideal..truck has the "Auto" system...but I find it near useless at highway speeds, as by time things start slipping enough for it to kick in you should already have been in 4x4.

..obviously a real effective full time all wheel drive would be much better

sounds like the Tacoma is set up like my Chev, and this alone is near a deal breaker

may get to drive an RL today...and may need to retest the Tacoma, if it's even still in the running..

.my first test was pretty lame...salesman said he wasn't allowed to let me run on gravel...wow...helpful..a TRD even...he did relent but it was a pathetic example of a road and low speed, so not conclusive by any means...may have to find another dealer, if I care that is

cheers
 
#24 ·
Ian, your comments on the 4 wheel drive system is helpful....I know there's some differences, but it's good to get some "real world" feedback.
It's good to know the details. Here are the details on the Ridgeline's VTM-4 system:
http://www.ridgelineownersclub.com/Variable-Torque-Management-VTM-4-Explanation.html

You never know when you'll find something surprising when comparing these systems. For example, it seems in this thread that the Tundra (possibly just 1st-gen?) turns off stabilisation when in 4WD.
Am getting used to pressing buttons to "shift on the fly" on my 02 Chevy, but can't say I like much..
I used to enjoy using my 4Runner's 4WD shifter at every intersection when driving in winter. Much of the season, straight stretches would be bare and dry, but intersections would still have some ice or snow. I don't miss it anymore.
and am unsure of how durable the system is using 4 Hi at highway speeds,
Given how fervently most 4WD manuals tell you to not use 4WD on dry pavement, it is reasonable to conclude that breakage is a real risk. I have test-driven several GM 4WD's where the FWD would not engage. It's unclear if they had been damaged from overuse, or if the mechanisms simply had seized from underuse.
plus gas mileage takes a dive..
Not only are you pushing the FWD system, you are also burning fuel to have the FWD and RWD fight each other due to slightly different wheel speeds, if there is no center differential.
so i tend to nurse it along in 2 wheel drive until roads get ugly, then push the button to 4 hi...not ideal..truck has the "Auto" system...but I find it near useless at highway speeds, as by time things start slipping enough for it to kick in you should already have been in 4x4.
Part-time 4WD is a very effective system for scenarios like hunting, where you start from a good road and go into a continuously degrading off-road terrain. When your RWD gets you into trouble, that's when you use 4WD to get out... but not to go further.

It's an entirely inappropriate solution for on-road applications, especially at highway speeds. Whether you use an Auto system or shift manually, it's often at a time that can most delicately be termed as "too late".

The most common hardware for 4WD pick-ups and many SUV's is as follows:
  • Part-time drive system with primarily RWD and selectable FWD.
  • No center differential, so 4WD depends on a slippery surface to allow different front-rear wheel speeds.
  • Solid rear axle.
  • Leaf springs, set tight enough to handle well when heavily loaded.
  • Stability control -- maybe.
  • Body on Frame construction.

Here are the kinds of things that go wrong in on-road scenarios under adverse, varying conditions:
  • Only RWD engaged when traction unexpectedly drops due to loose gravel, rain, snow, ice or black ice. You fishtail and head for the ditch backwards.
  • Regardless of RWD or 4WD, you hit a bump on a curve and get the dreaded axle hop. This is due to the solid axle, leaf springs, unloaded bed, and flex transmitting through the frame. You head for the ditch sideways.
  • You have 4WD engaged, try to take a sharp turn, but the RWD pushes the FWD faster, you get understeer, and head for the ditch in a forward and orderly manner.
On newer models, stability control will help to defeat the 1st problem and maybe the 3rd one. It's great that this bit of clever technology is there, but do you really want to depend on it to cover up a design weakness, every time?
..obviously a real effective full time all wheel drive would be much better
Yes, that and good suspension and stability control will significantly increase your maximum safe speed closer to the tires' theoretical limits. Hm... given how you say that you are always in a hurry and driving fast on slippery roads, I'm not sure that we should be encouraging you to buy something that will let you go faster. :)
sounds like the Tacoma is set up like my Chev, and this alone is near a deal breaker
My 3rd-gen 4Runner had a strain release mechanism that would automatically disengage the FWD if you used 4WD to the point where damage was imminent. I would not want to use that as an excuse to press my luck, but you might want to check for this detail on whatever you have short-listed.
may get to drive an RL today...and may need to retest the Tacoma, if it's even still in the running..

.my first test was pretty lame...salesman said he wasn't allowed to let me run on gravel...wow...helpful..a TRD even...he did relent but it was a pathetic example of a road and low speed, so not conclusive by any means...may have to find another dealer, if I care that is
So, they won't let you test it under the conditions for which it's specially designed. Given the problems that I listed above, the salesman might have been less worried about the gravel and more worried about the ditch. The Tacoma (especially the TRD) will probably have a bouncier stern than your Silverado. Drive with care and good luck.

Also, there are lots of earlier threads regarding the Ridgeline and the Toyota Tacoma and/or Tundra. Here is one:
http://www.ridgelineownersclub.com/forums/showthread.php?t=38848
I recommend that you use the Search tool, change the default from "Search Entire Posts" to "Search Titles Only", and search for the terms "Tacoma", "Tundra" and "Toyota". I could be very illuminating.
 
#22 ·
I found the Taco cab way too small and uncomfortable with a low seat. I would look seriously at the Tundra in addition to the Ridgeline. I looked at both (Tundra DoubleCab v. Ridgeline) and decided that the Ridgeline better suited my needs which are far different than yours. However, I drove about 15 miles with one grandson on gravel roads today, some rather bad. I thought of your need and felt the Tundra would be a good choice for that trip. However, when I took three grandsons grocery shopping early this morning, I appreciated the Ridge's trunk and lower entry height.
 
#23 ·
I can't speak from a mechanics point of view. But I do live in Alberta and have owned my ridge for almost a year and about 25000km. I have had no issues at all I have taken it to the mountains numerous times as well as through some deep rutted mud. I am however debating a lift because I have a bull bar on it and I feel it may be a bit low for the amount of snow we are going to get.
 
#25 ·
As fancy as the Ridgelines 4WD system is (and it is excellent good for icy/muddy roads) it still isn't suited for Northern Alberta winter lease roads. It doesn't have enough ground clearence and under body protection. The Texas pea gravel they have will literaly make it look like an angry elf crawled under the truck and banged away with a ball peen hammer. The best solution would be to find something used that you won't mind getting destroyed.

The few times I took my unmodified Ridge down a bad lease road it got there but I had to be uber careful and slow dodging the nastiest clearence situations. It just wasn't having a fun time. Now I just take my Land Rover LR3.
 
#27 ·
Since you're definitely looking for a double cab, be sure to test the Taco with the people you plan to carry in both the front and the rear. I was determined to buy a Tacoma DC until I sat in it - at 6'2", long body short legs I had the seat all the way back and tilted back too so my head wouldn't bang on the roof - and even then visibility was not great. With the front seat adjusted for me, there was no way a passenger could have fit behind me - there was literally 2 inches of legroom. I liked the truck otherwise - seemed pretty rugged, lots of nice serviceability features.

Tim
 
#28 ·
I love my Ridge and I go down a lot of gravel and dirt/mud washboard roads in the Virginia mountains. It does pretty good but it does have it's limits. I think I would fine an older, I mean really older, tough truck, fix it up mechanically the hell with the body, and use that.

Toughest vehicle I ever owned and literally beat the SH*t out of was a 1972 International Scout. 4 banger, 4 wheel drive (Warn type hubs) 3 on the floor (yes they did make one). It was solid steel, you could unbolt the cab to make it look like an old Land Rover. It sat a good 18-14 inches off th ground, had skid plates. No carpet just rubber mats so you could hose it out! Crank windows, no A/C. I lived in Pensacola Florida and bought it via mail from a dealer in Tampa. Had to have the dealer put in a heater core since I lived in "Northern Florida". I was a large acreage surveyor in the piney woods in the pan handle, and I drove it constantly down logging roads, sand bars, beaches, waded creeks, even places you could not walk! I could not kill it!

I had a visit once from a land owner who had to park his fancy Toyota Land Cruiser and walk 4 miles to meet me. He asked "hoe in the hell did you get that thing out here", I answered I drove it, then I gave him a ride back to his fancy rice burner.

Sorry for the trip down memory lane folks. If I treated my Ridge that hard, it would have died within a week.

:act035:
 
#29 ·
I think the OP needs to look at what the Russian ROC members do with their trucks. Granted, what they do with them is pretty extreme, and I don't know what they have to do as far as turn wrenches to keep them on the road, but man they sure put the RL through it's paces...!
 
#33 ·
You never know when you'll find something surprising when comparing these systems. For example, it seems in this thread that the Tundra (possibly just 1st-gen?) turns off stabilisation when in 4WD.

Ian,
That was the 2nd Gen for the at least the '07 model year.
 
#34 ·
Even if it isn't on the original poster's short list, the newer Jeep Wranglers, especially the Rubicon, are about the toughest factory vehicle you're going to find for continuous off road use. All models come stock with heavy Dana axles and the Rubicon come stock with a ridiculous HD Dana. All models have skid plate that'll balance the Jeep with no damage. All have great rock guard systems under the doors so the gravel isn't going to get it all pitted up. The Unlimited has seating for four and four real doors. And the best part is that resale value tends to be flat out ridiculous, among the best of any car out there. The trucks are fine, but other than the Raptor / Power Wagon / and maybe the TRD Baja none have any right in a comparison to the Wrangler for continuous off road usage. That said, it really doesn't sound like the conditions the OP is going to face are all that severe and the RL, or any host of other lighter duty options, would probably hold up just fine.

As for the 4WD system in the snow... it does great on slippery roads. I personally wouldn't use it in more severe off road situations. But I have my Big Red side by side to get around the property.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top