[fraugher]

Much more concerned about the interior than the exterior. My impression of the outside is it's inoffensive, which makes it on par with 11 of the 13 previous Hondas I have owned. Exceptions being the 89 Accord which I loved with the flip lights, and the RL1, which I understand to be odd but works fine for me. Honda never hits hard with styling and that can pay off with designs ageing well. Also, in the case of the RL2, I see a number of exterior design choices that can be corrected/altered/customized with some affordable bling, which is fun to do anyway... which leaves the interior, which IMHO was too car-like for the Pilot, and further off-base for the RL. It's certainly luxurious enough, but more or less impedes the utility aspect of how I use the RL.

 

[fraugher]

Owned a 2018 for 3 months, did not like the looks before or after, but like OP said, it can't offend either. What concerned me is it never grew on me in my short ownership. Parked it right next to my 2008 Ridge and everyday from every angle preferred the 2008 when I went out to the vehicles. Biggest offender was the front end, but the shallow bed plays too... IMHO Honda got the Pilot and Ridgeline backwards, with the Pilot having the more truckish fascia (but still not very...). When I see one on the road- and they're rare around here- they have no "new", nothing to turn a head, probably doesn't matter, but bet it does to Honda and some folks $40k lighter than yesterday. OPs argument sort of suggests there is no middle ground between G1 and G2, that Honda had to go this way, couldn't disagree more, erasing the buttress was the only pressing need for Honda.

More recent articles point to the Ranger being way overpriced (dropping sedans for truck profits the newest), so hopefully Honda can get a little shine on its MMR for the Ridgeline, shore up some quality concerns, and become a real Honda (spend 1 minute in a $25k Honda Accord Sport to see how little attention Honda has given this RL).