[CanAmSteve]

I am puzzled by some of the negative parts of their review.
Thoughts and comments will be appreciated.

CR suffers from reporting bias and the fact is is run by engineers. Very smart people, but who often come to incorrect conclusions. People who buy Subarus and Toyotas for reliability will report with a bias toward reliability - otherwise, they would be contradicting their own choices. That's called Confirmation Bias, and it skews the "reported" problems in CR ratings. Again, if CR was run by psychologists, things might be different

CR rates the RL highly. Confusingly, it rates it tops in the 2023 Buying Guide, but behind the Taco, Maverick and SC in the latest issue (Maverick and SC are in a smaller category). Why? Who knows? (Does CR even know?) Part of a rating is road testing and part reported reliability (probably zip reported yet for the SC and Maverick, so a thumbsuck?). As with any test (like my teachers) there is a tendency to "find" some negatives. The RL has a shallow bed (as noted by CR). Is this important? Probably not to the 90% who never put anything in their pickup bed.

Here are some other negatives, some depending on year: Crappy infotainment and laughable voice control. Sun visors leave areas that can't be shielded. In-bed inverter is a joke, and they forgot a 12V socket there. Headlights point at the sky with a case of beer in the bed/truck. Spare tire and jack are under a half-ton of gravel - whoops. Wrong fluid in the 6-speed trans (and a reluctance to admit it). Push-button shift sucks. Auto stop/start sucks. Newer G2 models have headlights and auto-dim that suck. CarPlay/AA work randomly. Wireless charging only worked in the lab. The party-trick tailgate is cheap compared to almost every other pickup today (clang!) and breaks the backup camera. And the ground clearance SUCKS big-time. A Camry does better

The Taco is a better truck. The RL is a better vehicle

 

[stevem5215]

Consumer Reports sucks. I subscribed for years. Loved reading it. Then some Green weenies started involvement. That was it. Subscription gone. They suck.

 

[Farther]

Consumer Reports sucks. I subscribed for years. Loved reading it. Then some Green weenies started involvement. That was it. Subscription gone. They suck.

What do you read instead of Consumer Reports?

 

[stevem5215]

I take naps now. A better use of my time compared to reading that magazine.

 

[danielgjankowski]

I am puzzled by some of the negative parts of their review.
Thoughts and comments will be appreciated.

I'm on my second RL, and I think they are great overall. It seems to me that quite a few people on this site or the Toyota sites over-think things. Just buy the dang truck. Nothing is perfect, but overall, Hondas are a better bet than most others.

 

[tmz]

That's because Honda no longer tops the reliability charts and hasn't for several years.

True, but CR showed Honda at fifth best for reliability of the 24 auto makers for which they had enough data to compare, in a report dated 11-15-22. That was behind, in order, Toyota, Lexus, BMW, and Mazda. The numerical scores ranged from Toyota and Lexus at 72, BMW and Mazda at 65, Honda at 62, down to Mercedes-Benz at the bottom with a 26.

And of course I wouldn't want to drive 5 miles in a Tacoma, let alone 5 hours.

 

[El Halcon]

We need a link but Id dare say if you really want to know the good, bad & ugly on a Honda RL just start digging into this site. It will both make you love & hate the vehicle at the same time but you will get the big picture of what owning one entails. Im admittingly a Newby to the club but I can tell you it boils down to loving the vehicle and its uniqueness more than its bugs & drawbacks with the biggest matzah ball being the major repair issues which keeps every owner on edge until its sold.

I keep hearing about major repair issues and things, but I have been driving Ridgelines since 2006. I had a 2006 a 2010 a 2016 (I think it was a 16) a 2017 a 2018 and now driving a 2020 RTL-E and I have not had any of the problems I hear about. I guess I have been lucky. I stick to the maintenance schedule and I have let my dealer do them. First it was because my work schedule didn't give me much time to do them and the dealer always gave me a loaner if they needed to keep it over night and a ride to work and a pickup when it was finished.

 

[EdW]

I subscribe to Consumer Reports and dutifully fill out the survey each year. In all my years, I don't think I have had to verify I actually own a vehicle for which I am offering my opinion. Every year they ask me if I still own this or that vehicle and I respond, of course telling the truth. How many people are out there gaming their system? I suspect more than a few.

I used to own a 2010 Toyota Tacoma Prerunner. I liked the truck and it was indeed fast and reliable, but Toyota's design team decision to keep the low roof styling chased me away. I suffer from neck issues and over the 8 years of ownership it gradually became more and more painful entering and exiting the truck. To be fair, I test drove the 2018 Tacoma first and was amazed that in addition to the low roofline, Toyota removed the treasured (by me) A Pillar grab handle. The model I tested didn't have running boards and apparently Toyota raised the truck one inch, so I had a tremendous difficulty crawling into the driver seat. Once on the road, I found the new engine was a DOG off the line. The salesman encouraged me by saying "you just wait until you hit 3k rpm, it will take off like a shot." It did, but what good is that. We tow a small travel trailer that weighs 3500 and need as much low end power as we can get. I drove down to the Honda dealership and took a test drive of their RL and 20 minutes later, was sold. Quiet, smooth, fast, convenient and I could enter and exit the truck with ease and no pain! Reliability is great, but not the only factor in picking a vehicle you need to live with for multiple years.

 

[Mark27]

Put me in the camp that has never considered CR for auto advice. Granted, my vehicles over the year have been more performance oriented and such ratings not part of their wheelhouse. I don't care what CR says.
My views on vehicles formed by Car and Driver in the late 70's and they are my bible for info. Cars I have owned are like a whos who of their 10 Best over the years. I would much rather have a fun less reliable car than a boring appliance that never has issues. Often get both like my CRX Si or S2000. Had a couple Porsche's and BMW's over the years and they each had their idiosyncrasies i.e. weak points but they were so fun to drive I didn't care. Camry or Corolla? Never in a million years. An Accord? yea I would consider one because it drives well from a performance perspective and fit and finish so far ahead of Toyota. Well, not for me but maybe for my wife's vehicle - I gotta have more performance like the Focus RS I have now - certainly did not buy or consider reliability - but meets my need for a powerful, AWD or rear drive, good handling (meaning high speed cornering, not parking!), firm suspension (I hate smooth, floaty ride) and decent seats (mine has form fitting Recaro seats) take precedence.
Above all and over anything anyone writes including C&D is test driving the vehicle and seeing how it feels and performs. That is just me, sorry for the rant just wanted to throw out another perspective. More than one way to look at it and just have to pick the approach that works.

 

[Cabman]

I am puzzled by some of the negative parts of their review.
Thoughts and comments will be appreciated.

Give it another year. It seems every new model comes out swinging with super high reliability. If you go back a year or two, predicted reliability for the Jeep Gladiator was on a par with Honda. Now look at it. I'm guessing Maverick will do the same and Honda will again rise to the top. 20k on my '21 and still flawless.

 

[pr1948]

I suspect those ratings are based on mostly first generation Ridgelines since there aren't many second generation Ridgelines that have had an opportunity to accumulate 200K+ miles.

why is that?

why is that?

sorry, you meant the length of time it has been out. got it

 

[john brown]

well say what you want about reliability, but I have yet to have to carry a bicycle in the bed to avoid walking with my 19 ridgeline, and yes, when I owned GM products the bicycle was always in the truck

 

[Cabman]

well say what you want about reliability, but I have yet to have to carry a bicycle in the bed to avoid walking with my 19 ridgeline, and yes, when I owned GM products the bicycle was always in the truck

When I owned a Ford, I always carried a toolbox. Ah, memories.

 

[zroger73]

CR can be a better reference for popular models that they receive a lot of data on, but I suspect the noise floor for a model like the Ridgeline is pretty high as I suggested in this post.

As evidence of this, you can see suspicious fluctuations in individual reliability categories from one year to the next.

"Transmisson major" reliability went from much worse than average for 2017 and 2018 to much better than average for 2019 then back down to average for 2020.
"Climate system" went from average to below average to worse than average to much better than average to average from 2017-2022.
"Power equipment" went from much worse than average to average to below average to much worse than average from 2017-2022.

The trend continues when you look at reliability ratings for the first generation Ridgeline.

For example, "in-car electronics" went from the highest possible rating to the lowest possible rating from 2007 to 2008 despite no changes to the in-car electronics between these model years. Power equipment, body hardware, body integrity, paint/trim, brakes, and drive system are other categories where reliability was all over the map according to CR and don't seem to align with reality.

I suspect the reason for this is that because so few survey are submitted each year for a niche model like the Ridgeline, a very small number (maybe even in the single digits) of reader surveys can change the results.

 

[J P]

Here's my opinion, I don't know what CR's survey methods are but self-reporting surveys frequently yield questionable results.

Agreed.

There's a difference between Consumer Reports individual auto/truck reviews and the July Reliability Ratings issue. Generally speaking, the individual reviews are accurate since each car/truck in the tested group are held to the same professional testing standards conducted under near-identical conditions at the same time.

[Although I have to admit the reviewers can be extremely picky on what constitutes a "defect." Example: A certain pickup was downrated because of "manufacturer defects" like a dimple dent in the exhaust pipe before the catalytic converter, a broken zip-tie on a wiring harness under the dash, a floor soundproofing mat under the cabin carpet that was missing a plastic anchor, and one of the door panel anchors wasn't fully seated. Obviously, none of the "defects' interfered with the vehicle safety, relaibility or operation, but CR treated them with equal weight as more serious defects on other models; they simply tallied the total number of defects found and put what the defects actually were in a footnote at the end of the article.]

On the other hand, the much hyped July issue is just plain garbage -- and that's not just my opinion. That's the opinion of any professional statistician. The defects are legend (for statisticians, at least) with the July Reliability issue:

• The reporting population is limited to CR subscribers who are a very distinct subset of vehicle owners
• CR subscribers tend to be more wealthy, more educated and more demanding ("picky") when it comes to vehicle performance standards.
• The ratings are self-reported on a voluntary basis, which further skews reliability results. For example, repeated studies have shown more people tend to complain about vehicle defects (even minor ones) than praise perfectly operating vehicles. In addition, this population tends to associate dealer-related issues (e.g., poor service) with a defect in the vehicle itself.
• Individual vehicle submissions are not listed. Not weighting responses for actual sales volume leads to misleading reliability ratings. A vehicle with annual sales of 50,000 units/yr should have any responses weighted when compared to a competing vehicle with 250,000/yr sale volume simply because a greater sales volume will always have more vehicle defects (as a raw count) than the 50k/yr vehicle. If the number of total responses vs vehicle sales volume is not reported, the reader can get a very biased view of "reliability."

There are other factors that make the July Reliability issue more worthy of bird cage liner than knowledge base.

In summary, the individual car/truck reviews CR publishes every month are worthy of examination and review, but the July review should be trashed as soon as it arrives.

 

[finnster]

I am puzzled by some of the negative parts of their review.
Thoughts and comments will be appreciated.

I've never held their reviews that high. I read all, try to read between the lines, do for myself. My only complaint was the rear door opening access. I'm a big guy and have to go in sideways to retrieve from the floor. I know there is a hinge that can be retrofitted but I don't modify my vehicles. CR - case and point, has never rated Scion vehicles well for durability or good used car choice. I had '5' - all were flawless and bulletproof. Never had a repair on any, maintenance only. 2006-2014 XA and XD. Everyone has their own likes and dislikes, opinion on what is good or enjoyable - or they dislike.
My 2 cents..........

 

[tmz]

CR can be a better reference for popular models that they receive a lot of data on, but I suspect the noise floor for a model like the Ridgeline is pretty high as I suggested in this post.

. . . .

I suspect the reason for this is that because so few survey are submitted each year for a niche model like the Ridgeline, a very small number (maybe even in the single digits) of reader surveys can change the results.

You could be right. CR says they don't rate vehicles or manufacturers for which they don't have enough data, but I couldn't find out what their floor is. I did find this from CR:

How Many Samples Do You Have of Each Model?
A typical vehicle has about 200 to 300 samples for each model year. When we have small sample sizes for models, we may use brand history and the reliability of similar models that may share major components to determine our predictions. Since 2015, we use an online questionnaire exclusively instead of our previous mix of electronic and paper surveys from members. That change shrank our respondent pool, but the internet-only surveys allow us to ask more in-depth questions and solicit detailed comments about problems.
What Effect Does Having a Larger Sample Size for Some Vehicles Compared With Others Have on the Validity of the Reliability Data?
Given an appropriate sample, the more data you have, the more statistical confidence you have in your information. A larger sample will always give more reliable information than a smaller sample (assuming, of course, that the data are valid and collected from an appropriate source).
When we have small sample sizes on vehicles, we may use brand history and the reliability of similar models that may share major components. This gives us the ability to predict reliability of brand-new vehicles or ones that have been recently redesigned. We will publish the data only if we feel the sample size is sufficiently large and indicative of the model.

CR also says they have strong data that their surveys are valid and reliable, and the data tracks well with repair and reliability data from other sources. And to address comments J P, they say they get many responses indicating no problems with the survey taker's cars in the previous years, and since the surveys include many items, appliances, TVs, etc., they think that reduces the effect of people only completing the surveys if they want to complain about problems. And it's interesting to note that CR says cars that are poor on their reliability list are not necessarily unreliable, just less so than others. I guess because cars in general are so much more reliable than in the past. One of the most unreliable cars in their survey had 40% of respondents report no problems in the previous year.

The full FAQ page on this issue might only be available to CR members, but here it is:

Consumer Reports' Car Reliability FAQ - Consumer Reports

Consumer Reports answers common car reliability survey questions to explain the thought process and science behind the ratings.

www.consumerreports.org

 

[Sparkland]

I have participated in a few of those Consumer Reports surveys.

 

[tmz]

I have participated in a few of those Consumer Reports surveys.

I've participated every year for decades, whether or not I have had problems with my vehicles.

 

[snakebait6]

From reading the reviews on the Consumer Reports article (survey which I did participate in), it appears that the less than stellar Honda reliability has caught up with the Ridgeline. What makes this really disappointing is which mid-sized trucks are rated above the Ridgeline and the margin of victory.

View attachment 433249

Tacoma was 24 points behind on the link that was published.