Honda Ridgeline Owners Club Forums banner

Ridgeline Looks - Success or Failure

22K views 92 replies 58 participants last post by  casique 
#1 ·
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.
 
See less See more
#33 · (Edited)
I like the looks of the gen 2 Ridgeline, but I also liked the looks of the gen 1 Ridgeline, which is part of why I bought it in 2005 when it first came out on the market. Then I heard from so many on both how ugly they thought it was and why would I want to spend $34,000 on a mid size truck when I could get a full sized truck. I drove and had both a 74 Chevy 4 x 4 and a two wheel drive Ford Ranger, turned out the Ridgeline was over 200 pounds heavier then my Chevy and the same width and a bit longer. Not till I went to a Ridgeline meet did I hear anyone refer of the truck as attractive.
 
#34 ·
Here's an interior shot from our 2016 Pilot showing something I hope is carried over to the new Ridgeline...
 
#35 · (Edited)
Some comments a few posts back about what "truck buyers" want... and Honda can't or won't deliver that with RL.
That's such an old load of crap. Are we not truck buyers? Really?
I've owned bigger/badder trucks, and if I needed/wanted one now, they are out there & available. The RL is NOT in competition with F150, RAM or any other full size truck.

It stands very capably amongst mid size truck offerings, and offers a uniquely different set of attributes. If you don't like them, that's fine. But to suggest that Honda can't build something "just like the others" is ludicrous. The point & root of the RLs best features comes from the fact that it is NOT engineered & built just like the others. And so far as towing goes, I'd tow anything with a RL that can be towed with a similarly equipped Taco, Frontier, GM Twin.

This vehicle (our vehicle), the Ridgeline is what it is intended to be. It's better in ways others cannot compare & lacks in some specific areas that are others' strengths. What's the big deal about this.... if you want what those others offer & can live without what the Ridgeline provides, then there's the door. The choice is there for all of us. It's just tiring to hear the same groans about "they could do this" and "they could do that" wrt heavier towing, gorilla engines, BOF, etc. etc.

It just seems dumb to me to criticize a vehicle for not being more like some other vehicle. Make your choice & move on.

And why THIS is even being discussed on a thread that was intended to discuss the 2017 RL looks is beyond me. For my part - sorry for the departure. But I just couldn't let that stand. Done.
 
#37 ·
I find it funny that people feel the need to come into this section of the forum to inform us that they won't buy it because price, looks, size, interior or anything else. It is what it is and no amount of whining is going to change it. Who care why you aren't going to buy one. I want to hear why you are going to buy one and I'm sure others do too.
 
#44 · (Edited)
The thread title does indicate success or failure which can be understood as positive and negative. Here are some positives below. For anyone to dismiss it and suggest they just go buy something else is a bit over the top, and move on like they are not welcome here just because its not what some want to hear, is not good.

Perhaps we should all just ignore it and move on just like the overpriced grocery item guy at the checkout. Its only an opinion and in most cases guys are just being honest and that honesty is sometimes the actual truth. Maybe the truth can hurt I don't know why, but it seems to be perhaps the case.

Lets move on and enjoy even it its positive and negative. I would be the first to congratulate any of you fellows on your new 2017 gen 2 RL! If it works for you get the deal done and start posting data!

Success which means positive:

1) cleaned up the back end lines nicely looks simple but clean and elegant no confusion at all which means it will be neutral and accepted more widely.

I like the definition line between the cab even though it seems to be getting some negitve attention.

2) Length bed wise is prefect for a midsize for their targeted audience. Workemen may want more (who knows) I don't think they target that audience though. imo
3) Interior size good doesn't change, storage useful like before.

4) Overall look in Honda's target audience will probably find it appealing not polarizing. Could lead to some new outside sells.

5) The looks will also appeal to people who don't want lifts don't care for more heavy offroad ( no not rock crawling)

6) Empty nesters will love it, people who are done with big trucks and custom cute built trucks from the factory.

7 If I hadn't grown out of first RL, or had Honda made it more heavy duty in its technical ability I would be interested even with the looks. (maybe/ maybe not ) Cost is another issue (negative)

Failure: Forget it, no need to get attacked here over it. Smile and enjoy the positives.
 
#45 ·
I have had my 06 since July of 2005, been on this forum for a very long time, went to the first All Cal meet in Santa Cruz. At that time the Ridge was still gawked at and often derided. If I had a dollar for every time someone ridiculed the truck, called it a sissy truck or, ha ha, a ricer, I could have paid my truck off early. It looked nothing like any other truck and here in far northern California, I was the first to get one and only one around for nearly a year. I was a rolling ad for the truck and showed it off often. The two biggest features that sold it was the trunk and back seats, biggest objection has always been the canted bed rails and the side sails. I now know a lot of people in my town that own one and love them, some of them that got introduced to it by me or by my recomendation to check out the Ridgeline owners club. I carried home made cards and brochures downloaded from the site, passed them around to anyone interested in the truck or had one and wanted more information about this club.

What interested me in the gen 1 was its safety ratings, crew cab for my dogs, all wheel drive and it was a Honda. I had been driving a Subaru, loved its all wheel drive and up here in our rain, mud, snow and rough roads, all wheel made better sense then four wheel for most situations. If Subaru had listened to me, they would have made a significantly larger Baja with a V6. I still like the Baja, no less ugly then the Ridgeline. I did not buy the RL because it was pretty, but because it was functional. But hey, I drove an old 64 International Harvester for 10 years. Sturdiest truck I have ever driven or owned. Drove a 74 Chevy Cheyenne all wheel drive for another 10, loved the looks of that truck, gas was crazy, 6 to 8 city, 10 highway. Fell in love with the Ridgeline, right off the bat, if they had made the outside as sturdy as the inside of the bed, for work people like me, I would have been in heaven. Honda should have done at least an interior redesign four of five years ago to prepare the buyers for a new generation. 10 years is a long time for a nearly unchanged vehicle and then to drop a new design, I am sure they must have expected some back draft.

I have always been curious, what was the point of the sloped bed rail and side sails on gen 1. Aerodynamics?
 
#46 · (Edited)
I have always been curious, what was the point of the sloped bed rail and side sails on gen 1. Aerodynamics?
Rigidity. That, and invisible reinforcement at the front of the bed under the rear window, gave the Ridgeline rigidity far beyond what other light trucks of the day had. I don't know about today, though. Ford certainly beefed up the frame of their F-150 around 2009.

Without special consideration for rigidity, it's easy to build a ladder frame with longitudinal strength, but hard to build one for torsional strength. This is a hidden part of why the Ridgeline is surprisingly stable when towing a trailer near its documented limits. Trailer sway can introduce frame flex to a body-on-frame tow vehicle, transmitting a wave from rear to front, destabilizing the entire rig. It's called a "wild ride".

More detail about the Ridgeline's design is here: http://www.pickuptrucks.com/html/2006/honda/ridgeline/interview.html

More detail about this w.r.t. ladder frame design is here:
http://www.ridgelineownersclub.com/forums/showpost.php?p=646565&postcount=9

Getting back on topic regarding the looks of the new Ridgeline: I'm fine with it. It doesn't really matter. I care what the truck can do, how reliably and comfortably it can do it, and how much it costs.

I do not care much about how rounded any body panels are because I am an adult who isn't worried by what appears to be a major motivating factor in truck-buying, "phallic insecurity". Anyone who has seen what passed for a compact Fiat truck in Europe understands that not everyone's purchases are directed by the constant need for, er, frontal reassurance.
 
#47 ·
Posted this elsewhere, but applies/fits here too. I'm a very long time Honda owner. I've have a 93 Accord since new & also an 11 CR-V, (& many others in the past). I like the new RL's looks, a lot. I like the G1 too, but my wife hated it's looks, so we never got one, but now that may change. The more traditional looks will sway her (and I think many) to allow us to consider one. The CR-V is great, but it's not a truck, the new RL will fix that. My biggest concerns are how reliable it will be(Honda has had some probs of late) and how much it costs. 40k+ for a top of the line will hurt it's sales, IMO.
 
#49 ·
My biggest concerns are how reliable it will be(Honda has had some probs of late) and how much it costs. .[/QUOTE

Reliability, I can only speak for myself; RL owner since spring of 2005; 2006 RTL, 2008 RTL, 2013 RTL. "0" problems. Honda in general, 18 since 1981, 1 warranty claim on an 84 Accord for a transmission bearing. As far as cost, that is TBD, I would think 2 trim levels over $40K and an entry level in the low $30K range. My 3 have all been RTL W/O Navi and that is the route I would take with the GEN II.
 
#48 ·
Keep in mind that the Ridgeline is a much more complex vehicle to build than the ladder frame pickups. It should be a safer pickup to drive also because of it's construction.

Just saying, that's one way I understand the higher price than the more conventional pickups. Pay more but get more.
 
#50 ·
Why do you think that the Ridge is going to be significantly more expensive than the comparably equipped competition?

Those complaining about the potential $40kplus price tag probably haven't looked at top end midsize truck pricing recently.

Honda will be well aware of the pricing of the competition and they will price the GenII Ridge accordingly.
 
#52 · (Edited)
I looked at the front end of my gen 1 today (and I have the optional blacked out sport grille) and thought, they blew it with the gen 2.
I liked the front end of the earlier 2006-2008 even better than mine. Gen 1 looks more like a truck, especially from the front..gen 2 looks better at the rear. But that is not what is usually coming towards you!

If you like it and want it, I am sure it is a good truck, after all it's based on the gen 1. But as far as attracting new owners...it wont come easy.
 
#53 ·
I was stopped at an intersection today, across from a Chevy Colorado coming my direction. It was a more basic model, not girded up with trim kits. Except for the front fascia, I thought it could as well have been a Gen 2 RL. The aerodynamic smoothing is the future, and what looks "soft" now will become the new norm.
 
#54 ·
Certainly to meet new CAFE standards. As may be the case with the gen 2, some new models try too hard to meet everyone's approval. Ending up with a vehicle that looks like it was designed by a committee. Of course it is not that bad.

Should be interesting to see what new concept is in the works for the next Toyota trucks since all their cars have morphed into a curvy, sleek thing with gigantic big mouths\ front ends.

But their trucks might have small mouths... no macho thing here..but more strange than 'soft'I think.
 

Attachments

#56 ·
I have never cared for the plain vanilla looks of most Toyotas and Hondas. "Offend no one" at the expense of making any sort of statement. I have to give Toyota credit for recently balking that trend with the unifying "fish mouth" theme that they have going on. I personally don't care much for it in most executions but it has set them apart from the rest of the vanilla field. That Lexus may not be your cup of tea but it is a hell of a lot bolder of a design than the Acura stuff. I can respect that even if I don't care for how it looks . . .

Is it a good sales move? Hard to say. I might be like Starbucks shaping the coffee tastes of the masses. They got everyone hooked on a strong, burnt coffee flavor that now seems to be equated with quality.
 
#57 ·
I like the analogy.. maybe because I enjoy coffee so much (like Kick Ass and Death Wish) but I digress.

I agree on Toyota testing the waters.. seems pretty brazen but it seems to work for them.
I actually think they are pretty cool, but for someone else not me.
The Acura grilles never really bothered me except they seem to be getting too old now, and due a change. Or maybe it's just the coffee talking!
 
#62 ·
I like the analogy.. maybe because I enjoy coffee so much (like Kick Ass and Death Wish) but I digress.
The 454 is my daily morning coffee.
 
#58 · (Edited)
I'm neutral on the "looks" of the Gen2. But I'm not pleased with the overall vehicle. While I'm sure Honda believes they have hit their target demographic (whatever that may be), I think they missed the target entirely for those of us who hoped for a more truck-like Gen2. Then they added VCM--the "deal-breaker" for me. No matter how improved the newer VCM may be, I won't buy a vehicle if it has VCM.

Been there, done that, don't want a re-play.

Oh well.....

Sigh....
 
#59 ·
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!
 
#65 ·
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".
 
#67 · (Edited)
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.

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. . . .
 
#66 ·
Dealers have not and do not - have any problems selling the Honda truck.
 
#68 ·
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?
 
#70 ·
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.
 
#73 ·
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.
 
#75 ·
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,
 
#74 ·
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).
 
  • Like
Reactions: Carsmak and DOB
#76 ·
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.
 
#77 ·
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.
 
  • Like
Reactions: noside85
#79 ·
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.......
 
#80 ·
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.
 
#81 ·
Cringe everytime a G1 pass by, fugly...fugly...fugly overwhelms the senses.
G2 looks is perfect for a practical truck. Does the job without need to compensate for truck driver insecurities.
Every time I look at the Taco parked across the street mind is inundated with thoughts of looks like a box, drives like a box, great for the 5% that does extreme rock climbing; someone is over compensating.
 
#90 ·
Hona Truck



Very well put. Could not agree more!!
 
#82 ·
The looks have definitely grown on me. I especially love the front 3/4 view and I think the side and rear/side profiles of my BE look fantastic. My girlfriend and I were at the Mazda dealership to get a CX9 for her last week, and a lot of the employees complimented the classy looks of the truck.
 
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