The Lexus looks like it's getting a face pinch from the half senile old aunt it only sees on Thanksgiving and Christmas.
The Acura is her 40 year old buck tooth son who still lives with her.
Ridgeline Looks - Success or Failure
My Opinion - Long Post
Soft. Girly. Bland. Round. Blah. These are just some of the words I have read in this forum over the past few days. Are they true? Maybe, but everyone has a right to their opinions and the famous quote "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder" has never been more true than with the introduction of the Gen 2 Ridgeline right? Wrong, and here's why:
From when the first generation of Ridgeline was introduced to the day the last one was sold, the looks were NOT described using the adjectives shown above. It was either A) Nice looking or B) It's ugly. There was very little middle ground with the Gen 1 Ridgeline looks. Now some people who thought it was ugly ended up buying one because of the clever features and utility and "Honda." If the Gen 1 Ridgeline was anything it was polarizing in the looks department. We can all say what we want but we all know that if you don't like the looks of a vehicle you won't enjoy owning the vehicle. Personally I pride myself on owning practical, well made vehicles but even I want the thing to look decent!
Now, many (most) of the previous and current Gen1 owners blame the lack of sales of the Gen 1 squarely on the shoulders of Honda marketing and advertising. I don't know how many times I have heard "Honda should have had more commercials" or "Honda should have more internet ads." True, to a point. What you guys are forgetting is the LOOKS of the Gen 1 Ridgeline. Like it or hate it... there is no in-between. We have forgotten this in the past 10 years. In my opinion the Gen 1 low sales numbers were low mainly because of the body design and the "look" of the vehicle. How many times have you heard or read about that "sail" or the "high bed" or all the other descriptive words people say? I heard "It's ugly" more times than I could count. Sure, when they rode in it they loved it. When they got out they hated it. Many vehicles have been wildly successful with minimal advertising and marketing. My 4Runner is a prime example. They have run a few commercials over the past six years (four I think) and they sold 100K units last year. Word of mouth is much more valuable than advertising and vehicle looks trumps them all.
With that said I have read several comments in the past few days lamenting the fact that the Gen 2 does not look like the Gen 1! Really? You don't want Honda to sell many of the Gen 2 Ridgelines?
Honda designs are typically bland. The Gen 1 Ridgeline was bold and you see what happened. Tacoma's got redesigned last year and you have to look hard to see what they changed. Why screw with a good thing? The CR-V and the Pilot are two of the best selling vehicles in their class. If looks are so important (and they are) why NOT make a truck with the same basic look as their successful siblings! Your argument is going to be "In the truck market, things have to be manly and tough." I call BS on that. There is nothing tough or manly about the Chevy Colorado. Heck, what is a tough or manly look anyhow? Put muscles and a mustache on it? Make it tall and rugged with a few scars?
The new Ridgeline is fairly bland, true, but apparently America wants bland. Look at the top sellers in each class. Bland is king. Even the F series truck (which hasn't changed significantly in years) is bland, yet they sell a bunch of them. For all those that feel miffed because they think the past and current Ridgeline owners aren't getting what THEY want? Think for a minute: How many are there? Enough to make the Gen 2 successful? I think not. Also you are getting most everything you had (pass through excepting) in hopefully a broader appeal package. If I were Honda I wouldn't listen to me when it came to the looks department... I thought the Gen 1 looked nice lol. Yeah, me and not very many others.
Bottom line is this: The Gen 2 Ridgeline is basically a Pilot with a bed. Sure, it has some clever features and a few different styling ques but in essence it is exactly that: Bland, not over the top, no wild colors, in other words, comfortable. So some of you can criticize the look as bland or girly or even "meh." The truth is the "bold" experiment of the Gen 1 didn't work so well. The proof on how successful the Gen 2 Ridgeline will be is in the sales numbers. I think they will succeed precisely for the reason some of you think they will fail... looks.
Soft. Girly. Bland. Round. Blah. These are just some of the words I have read in this forum over the past few days. Are they true? Maybe, but everyone has a right to their opinions and the famous quote "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder" has never been more true than with the introduction of the Gen 2 Ridgeline right? Wrong, and here's why:
From when the first generation of Ridgeline was introduced to the day the last one was sold, the looks were NOT described using the adjectives shown above. It was either A) Nice looking or B) It's ugly. There was very little middle ground with the Gen 1 Ridgeline looks. Now some people who thought it was ugly ended up buying one because of the clever features and utility and "Honda." If the Gen 1 Ridgeline was anything it was polarizing in the looks department. We can all say what we want but we all know that if you don't like the looks of a vehicle you won't enjoy owning the vehicle. Personally I pride myself on owning practical, well made vehicles but even I want the thing to look decent!
Now, many (most) of the previous and current Gen1 owners blame the lack of sales of the Gen 1 squarely on the shoulders of Honda marketing and advertising. I don't know how many times I have heard "Honda should have had more commercials" or "Honda should have more internet ads." True, to a point. What you guys are forgetting is the LOOKS of the Gen 1 Ridgeline. Like it or hate it... there is no in-between. We have forgotten this in the past 10 years. In my opinion the Gen 1 low sales numbers were low mainly because of the body design and the "look" of the vehicle. How many times have you heard or read about that "sail" or the "high bed" or all the other descriptive words people say? I heard "It's ugly" more times than I could count. Sure, when they rode in it they loved it. When they got out they hated it. Many vehicles have been wildly successful with minimal advertising and marketing. My 4Runner is a prime example. They have run a few commercials over the past six years (four I think) and they sold 100K units last year. Word of mouth is much more valuable than advertising and vehicle looks trumps them all.
With that said I have read several comments in the past few days lamenting the fact that the Gen 2 does not look like the Gen 1! Really? You don't want Honda to sell many of the Gen 2 Ridgelines?
Honda designs are typically bland. The Gen 1 Ridgeline was bold and you see what happened. Tacoma's got redesigned last year and you have to look hard to see what they changed. Why screw with a good thing? The CR-V and the Pilot are two of the best selling vehicles in their class. If looks are so important (and they are) why NOT make a truck with the same basic look as their successful siblings! Your argument is going to be "In the truck market, things have to be manly and tough." I call BS on that. There is nothing tough or manly about the Chevy Colorado. Heck, what is a tough or manly look anyhow? Put muscles and a mustache on it? Make it tall and rugged with a few scars?
The new Ridgeline is fairly bland, true, but apparently America wants bland. Look at the top sellers in each class. Bland is king. Even the F series truck (which hasn't changed significantly in years) is bland, yet they sell a bunch of them. For all those that feel miffed because they think the past and current Ridgeline owners aren't getting what THEY want? Think for a minute: How many are there? Enough to make the Gen 2 successful? I think not. Also you are getting most everything you had (pass through excepting) in hopefully a broader appeal package. If I were Honda I wouldn't listen to me when it came to the looks department... I thought the Gen 1 looked nice lol. Yeah, me and not very many others.
Bottom line is this: The Gen 2 Ridgeline is basically a Pilot with a bed. Sure, it has some clever features and a few different styling ques but in essence it is exactly that: Bland, not over the top, no wild colors, in other words, comfortable. So some of you can criticize the look as bland or girly or even "meh." The truth is the "bold" experiment of the Gen 1 didn't work so well. The proof on how successful the Gen 2 Ridgeline will be is in the sales numbers. I think they will succeed precisely for the reason some of you think they will fail... looks.
61 - 80 of 93 Posts
The Lexus looks like it's getting a face pinch from the half senile old aunt it only sees on Thanksgiving and Christmas.
The Acura is her 40 year old buck tooth son who still lives with her.
The 454 is my daily morning coffee.I like the analogy.. maybe because I enjoy coffee so much (like Kick Ass and Death Wish) but I digress.
Great First Post! Welcome to the fold.As an outsider who has never owned a Honda Ridgeline I have to say the new model has totally caught my eye. I've been searching for a replacement truck since my 04 Nissan Titan is getting up there in age 115k and I'm tired of stupid things breaking on it (window regulators, axle seals, rear brakes, IPDM, ATP 4x4 switch,front brakes-3 times from being undersized, rear brake line, emergency brake that doesn't hold, passenger power seat broke, rear seat belt wouldn't retrack, radiator cracked, manifold leaks, CD player doesn't work, AUX jack doesn't work).
My wife and I really like the new Pilot and now that I've seen the new Gen2 Ridgeline I'm excited to check it out. We have an 08 Honda Odyssey that has been down right unbreakable in the years we've owned it, seriously the ONLY thing we have done is oil changes,1 battery, tires, windshield wipers, and a timing belt at 110k--we're still on the original brakes front and rear!!!
The reliability alone of the Odyssey has made the new Ridgeline my #1 pick even if it's not a true "truck". I've only owned full size trucks (Ford F150-transmission OD blew @ 62k plus numerous other stupid crap, Chevy Silverado 1500- engine valve @90k plus a slew of sensors, never attempted owning a dodge) I'm willing to give this thing a look; even the FWD model since there's less to go wrong.
What caught my eye is the bed with the large storage compartment underneath that I'll be able to put some of my common tools for jobs I do for people. That along with the Odyssey like ride, better fuel mileage and quiet interior are all HUGE pluses for me and the kids. I'm really excited to see one in person.
Sorry for the long post!
:act030:
I dig that one too!The 454 is my daily morning coffee.
I will buy the G2 AWD Ridgeline... For MPG, Reliability and awesome interior........but why not have looks AND reliability and sell 10 times more...
I will not feel good driving the Ridgeline....ever......as I would a GMC Canyon or the New Ford Ranger.....and I want that good feeling... Just saying..
KIA stepped up in the design department.. I drive a new Kia Sorrento for an SUV... and it feels like the ....New Honda's I've owned (Six) 88 thru 2004 Accords....in the past.
The Ridgeline concept sells solely on practicality...features and reliability.... If Honda wanted to it could look rugged....and be awesome...for the masses.
Ford Escort sold millions in the 80's through 90's but...yuk..... Honda quit being .......Yuk.. I cannot believe the design engineer... stepped back.... looked at the Ridgeline and
said " Good Job".
I will not feel good driving the Ridgeline....ever......as I would a GMC Canyon or the New Ford Ranger.....and I want that good feeling... Just saying..
KIA stepped up in the design department.. I drive a new Kia Sorrento for an SUV... and it feels like the ....New Honda's I've owned (Six) 88 thru 2004 Accords....in the past.
The Ridgeline concept sells solely on practicality...features and reliability.... If Honda wanted to it could look rugged....and be awesome...for the masses.
Ford Escort sold millions in the 80's through 90's but...yuk..... Honda quit being .......Yuk.. I cannot believe the design engineer... stepped back.... looked at the Ridgeline and
said " Good Job".
Dealers have not and do not - have any problems selling the Honda truck.
It was the PILOT design engineer that stepped back and (probably) patted themselves on the back. The Pilot was softened to appeal to broader SUV market that includes urban dwellers and women. Aerodynamics also played a role.I will buy the G2 AWD Ridgeline... For MPG, Reliability and awesome interior........but why not have looks AND reliability and sell 10 times more...
I will not feel good driving the Ridgeline....ever......as I would a GMC Canyon or the New Ford Ranger.....and I want that good feeling... Just saying..
KIA stepped up in the design department.. I drive a new Kia Sorrento for an SUV... and it feels like the ....New Honda's I've owned (Six) 88 thru 2004 Accords....in the past.
The Ridgeline concept sells solely on practicality...features and reliability.... If Honda wanted to it could look rugged....and be awesome...for the masses.
Ford Escort sold millions in the 80's through 90's but...yuk..... Honda quit being .......Yuk.. I cannot believe the design engineer... stepped back.... looked at the Ridgeline and
said " Good Job".
For the Ridgeline there was NO BUDGET to deviate from the Pilots sheet metal and there is very little that can be done with just changing the plastics on the front. New sheet metal would have involved large expenses for development (crash worthiness, wind tunnel etc etc) and for the manufacturing of unique to the Ridgeline parts.
Honda wants the Ridgeline in their lineup but they have a very low level of commitment to it.
Thank the Pilot for the very existence of the Ridgeline. . . .
Honda cannot sell 10x more Ridgelines because they cannot build 10x more Ridgelines. They need to allocate more factory resources, which means building fewer Pilots and Odysseys, which are arguably* more important to Honda, or re-allocating production in another factory.
* I say arguably, because the SUV/Truck market is so hot right now, perhaps Honda should put more emphasis on the Ridgeline rather than the Odyssey?
* I say arguably, because the SUV/Truck market is so hot right now, perhaps Honda should put more emphasis on the Ridgeline rather than the Odyssey?
Welcome to the forum. I have the same truck, and a new ridgeline.As an outsider who has never owned a Honda Ridgeline I have to say the new model has totally caught my eye. I've been searching for a replacement truck since my 04 Nissan Titan is getting up there in age 115k and I'm tired of stupid things breaking on it (window regulators, axle seals, rear brakes, IPDM, ATP 4x4 switch,front brakes-3 times from being undersized, rear brake line, emergency brake that doesn't hold, passenger power seat broke, rear seat belt wouldn't retrack, radiator cracked, manifold leaks, CD player doesn't work, AUX jack doesn't work).
My wife and I really like the new Pilot and now that I've seen the new Gen2 Ridgeline I'm excited to check it out. We have an 08 Honda Odyssey that has been down right unbreakable in the years we've owned it, seriously the ONLY thing we have done is oil changes,1 battery, tires, windshield wipers, and a timing belt at 110k--we're still on the original brakes front and rear!!!
The reliability alone of the Odyssey has made the new Ridgeline my #1 pick even if it's not a true "truck". I've only owned full size trucks (Ford F150-transmission OD blew @ 62k plus numerous other stupid crap, Chevy Silverado 1500- engine valve @90k plus a slew of sensors, never attempted owning a dodge) I'm willing to give this thing a look; even the FWD model since there's less to go wrong.
What caught my eye is the bed with the large storage compartment underneath that I'll be able to put some of my common tools for jobs I do for people. That along with the Odyssey like ride, better fuel mileage and quiet interior are all HUGE pluses for me and the kids. I'm really excited to see one in person.
Sorry for the long post!
I fixed the brake problems with better rotors and pads, and SS lines.
No axle leaks, no IPDM, but have lost two front window motors, a radiator and a set of manifolds,
That said my titan has had a very very hard life with 80% towing duty out of 92K miles at the boat shop - pulling at or near maximum weight all the time through the scorching desert heat that is the Davis Dam j2807 tow test and brutal Parker Arizona.
Im extremely happy with the ridge, try to have a phone call in any other truck at 80 MPH, drive all day the titan or any other half ton NA truck will wear you down quickly the effort and noise.
after a day of driving the ridge I jump out after 8 hours feeling fresh and ready.
When unloaded or lightly loaded which is the default mode you see most pickups in (only air in them) - the ridgeline has no peers. Its even nicer than my lexus SUV to drive.
I suspect Ill end up doing the brakes on the ridge however - they seem like they are juuuust barely enough for the task at hand.
UD
Attachments
-
145 KB Views: 273
Ridgeline is sort of an anomaly. No one wants to buy them and Honda doesn't want to make them. My local dealer has 84 Pilots and 4 Ridgelines. Perhaps Honda knows what the real appetite is for this vehicle, not enough to justify a plant change or reallocation. It is just a good subset of a Pilot with a bed. Imagine what Honda could have done with a ground up design. A handful of RL's per dealer doesn't count IMO to be considered consumer friendly. Ford announced today that the only non truck/ non suv's to be produced going forward will be the Mustang and the Focus. Ford makes a good F-150 hopefully the Ranger will be good but at least produced in numbers to be consumer friendly.Honda cannot sell 10x more Ridgelines because they cannot build 10x more Ridgelines. They need to allocate more factory resources, which means building fewer Pilots and Odysseys, which are arguably* more important to Honda, or re-allocating production in another factory.
* I say arguably, because the SUV/Truck market is so hot right now, perhaps Honda should put more emphasis on the Ridgeline rather than the Odyssey?
Seriously think the Canyon looks good. The only other truck more out of proportion is the Taco. Both look like they were assembled from left over parts.I will buy the G2 AWD Ridgeline... For MPG, Reliability and awesome interior........but why not have looks AND reliability and sell 10 times more...
I will not feel good driving the Ridgeline....ever......as I would a GMC Canyon or the New Ford Ranger.....and I want that good feeling... Just saying..
KIA stepped up in the design department.. I drive a new Kia Sorrento for an SUV... and it feels like the ....New Honda's I've owned (Six) 88 thru 2004 Accords....in the past.
The Ridgeline concept sells solely on practicality...features and reliability.... If Honda wanted to it could look rugged....and be awesome...for the masses.
Ford Escort sold millions in the 80's through 90's but...yuk..... Honda quit being .......Yuk.. I cannot believe the design engineer... stepped back.... looked at the Ridgeline and
said " Good Job".
I think Honda and Toyota both seriously want to be just car companies. Tough times ahead for them as consumers continue to go gaga over SUVs and trucks.Ridgeline is sort of an anomaly. No one wants to buy them and Honda doesn't want to make them. My local dealer has 84 Pilots and 4 Ridgelines. Perhaps Honda knows what the real appetite is for this vehicle, not enough to justify a plant change or reallocation. It is just a good subset of a Pilot with a bed. Imagine what Honda could have done with a ground up design. A handful of RL's per dealer doesn't count IMO to be considered consumer friendly. Ford announced today that the only non truck/ non suv's to be produced going forward will be the Mustang and the Focus. Ford makes a good F-150 hopefully the Ranger will be good but at least produced in numbers to be consumer friendly.
If we play trends out to their conclusions, Honda and Toyota will be the premiere car mfrs with not much else, and Ford/GM will be premiere truck mfrs with not much else. Ford just took another step in that direction.
If gas goes north of $5 gallon, it will be good times for Honda and Toyota, and bad for Ford and GM, instead of the other way around. Just my opinions, of course.
Looks is the least of my concerns when it comes to choosing a vehicle. I think the GMC Canyon looks rugged, but not good--it looks a bit like a transformer toy. The new Ranger (not out yet, and I don't like to buy a new vehicle in the first year anyway because of the typical bugs) looks bland at best, and a bit goofy, with the long hood and the long very swept-back windshield.
I don't have a G2 Ridgeline because it is the best looking truck out there, that's just a little extra benefit. Why can't a truck look elegant? It doesn't have to look rugged. And I drove a G1 Ridgeline for 11 years even though it was the ugliest truck on the road. Function over form.
I don't have a G2 Ridgeline because it is the best looking truck out there, that's just a little extra benefit. Why can't a truck look elegant? It doesn't have to look rugged. And I drove a G1 Ridgeline for 11 years even though it was the ugliest truck on the road. Function over form.
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).
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).
My uncle has a Ranger diesel in Ireland and he loves it, Ford has being supplying Europe with the same design as the one they are going to import or build here in 2018. Its 3 years old now and never had any probs so far, Hopefully they give the same config as his, Its a farm truck and gets lots of abuse,Looks is the least of my concerns when it comes to choosing a vehicle. I think the GMC Canyon looks rugged, but not good--it looks a bit like a transformer toy. The new Ranger (not out yet, and I don't like to buy a new vehicle in the first year anyway because of the typical bugs) looks bland at best, and a bit goofy, with the long hood and the long very swept-back windshield.
I don't have a G2 Ridgeline because it is the best looking truck out there, that's just a little extra benefit. Why can't a truck look elegant? It doesn't have to look rugged. And I drove a G1 Ridgeline for 11 years even though it was the ugliest truck on the road. Function over form.
It is a 'success' to me because I bought one. Styling is subjective and the G1 never appealed to me - thought it looked like a Pontiac Aztec with an open bed. Note that even though I am a Honda guy, I passed on a G1 and bought a loaded 2007 Frontier Nismo (which actually did have off road ability without looking ridiculous) so it isn't like I was looking for a 'soft' truck at the time. Or even now, if I could justify it at all I'd have a Raptor in my driveway.
The G2 fixed those issues - the styling is commensurate with the abilities of the truck. I highly doubt if it had a 'rugged' grill it would be the star of cars and coffee or give me waves of admiration from that guy in the RAM 2500. This is always going to be a niche product - stop pretending that if Honda just gets the right formula on how it looks that suddenly it is going to be selling like the Civic. There are so many good truck choices out there now or coming out in the next year that if you don't like what the RL offers, go buy something else.
The G2 fixed those issues - the styling is commensurate with the abilities of the truck. I highly doubt if it had a 'rugged' grill it would be the star of cars and coffee or give me waves of admiration from that guy in the RAM 2500. This is always going to be a niche product - stop pretending that if Honda just gets the right formula on how it looks that suddenly it is going to be selling like the Civic. There are so many good truck choices out there now or coming out in the next year that if you don't like what the RL offers, go buy something else.
I prefer the G2 looks over G1 just different times.
I never bought into the square jaw frontal look as other trucks have since 1950s
That look makes it masculine truck to some but look at 1940s pickup trucks they look much better.
All the other trucks look the same except Ridgeline and Dodge Ram tries to make a statement from others.
I never bought into the square jaw frontal look as other trucks have since 1950s
That look makes it masculine truck to some but look at 1940s pickup trucks they look much better.
All the other trucks look the same except Ridgeline and Dodge Ram tries to make a statement from others.
I prefer the G2 looks over G1 just different times.
I never bought into the square jaw frontal look as other trucks have since 1950s
That look makes it masculine truck to some but look at 1940s pickup trucks they look much better.
All the other trucks look the same except Ridgeline and Dodge Ram tries to make a statement from others.
I agree - for example the GM AK and Advance Design (41-early 55) are much better looking than the Task Force and later designs.
IMHO the G2 has its own look as a truck and it may not seem as "tough looking" as some trucks out there but it has its own merits. I personally didn't care much for the G1 version but it grew on me over time although I never owned one, came close. The G2 has been the same for me, it has grown on me over time and when I see the ones lowered just a bit and upgraded wheels they look tough in their own way. The best part of the Honda is that it gets the best gas mileage of all the small trucks and handles about as close to a sports sedan as you can get in a truck. Not too mention it has some nice features you don't get in all the other trucks. Just came from a Dodge Ram 1500 Big Horn and I don't miss it to be honest. Best advice, but whichever truck you want, good to have choices.......
My new neighbor has a Chevy off road. Talk about vacant wheel wells and cladding that’s an afterthought. Fugly!
Was behind a Canyon the other day. I’m betting their off-road clearance is measured sans th3 spare tire in place. There can’t be more than six inches mounted.
Was behind a Canyon the other day. I’m betting their off-road clearance is measured sans th3 spare tire in place. There can’t be more than six inches mounted.
61 - 80 of 93 Posts
- This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Honda Ridgeline Owners Club Forums
Honda Ridgeline Owners Club, forum community to discuss reviews, accessories, performance, care, mods, and more.
Full Forum Listing
