Honda Ridgeline Owners Club Forums banner

1 - 20 of 48 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
51 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Here is video that puts the Ridgeline 2020 vs the 4 cylinder turbo Ranger vs the Gladiator.

 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
5,454 Posts
Here is video that puts the Ridgeline 2020 vs the 4 cylinder turbo Ranger vs the Gladiator.

Thanks for the video. Nothing wrong with the Ridgeline results.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,133 Posts
Nothing wrong with the Ridgeline results.
Agreed, but honestly, 0 to 60? That wasn't even on the scope for consideration when we purchased our Ridgeline! And, 6 MPG difference in fuel economy? Yawn! Now, if maybe we were talking 10 MPG or better? Or, where I like to compare our 70's era vehicles making 8-maybe 15 MPG?

Bill
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
15,148 Posts
Silly and useless, but entertaining comparison. :)

The Ridgeline and Gladiator are different tools for different jobs - both happen to have a bed.

The turbocharged Ranger likely won the 0-60 test because the vehicles were tested at 5,000 feet above sea level resulting in the Ridgeline and Gladiator's naturally-aspirated engines being down about 15% on power.

When driving the Ridgeline, Nathan said, "I have the traction control off, I have it in sport mode, and I also shut off the auto start", but didn't mention using the paddle shifter to manually downshift to 1st. The "little bit of a pause there" that Nathan described after take-off may have been the transmission downshifting from 2nd to 1st (it normally starts in 2nd then downshifts to 1st when you give it the beans unless you manually select 1st with the paddle shifter in S mode).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
171 Posts
Agreed, but honestly, 0 to 60? That wasn't even on the scope for consideration when we purchased our Ridgeline! And, 6 MPG difference in fuel economy? Yawn! Now, if maybe we were talking 10 MPG or better? Or, where I like to compare our 70's era vehicles making 8-maybe 15 MPG?

Bill
Completely agree on the 0-60 time, could care less about that. But 6 mpg is a pretty big jump. The difference between 20 and 26mpg is a 30% increase in mileage (or 23% reduction in fuel usage). Just did a quick calculation on my own usage. If I extrapolate that out over the last year, that would have saved me ~$150 and I only drove it 5500 miles.

Then again, we know the cluster estimate is off by a fair amount for most of us.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
54 Posts
Ford also requires Premium fuel, which is an additional .25 to.35 /Litre ($1.03-$1.32 us/Gal) in Canadian $.
The Ford mileage will cost you 25-35% more at the pumps.
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
15,148 Posts
Ford also requires Premium fuel, which is an additional .25 to.35 /Litre ($1.03-$1.32 us/Gal) in Canadian $.
The Ford mileage will cost you 25-35% more at the pumps.
Premium is recommended to achieve the advertised power. The fuel economy ratings are based on regular.

From the 2020 Ford Ranger Owner's Manual:

"Your vehicle is designed to operate on regular unleaded gasoline with a minimum pump (R+M)/2 octane rating of 87.

For best overall vehicle and engine performance, premium fuel with an octane rating of 91 or higher is recommended."


From Ford's website:

"Horsepower and torque ratings based on premium fuel per SAE J1349® standard. Your results may vary."
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
290 Posts
The Ridgeline and Gladiator are different tools for different jobs - both happen to have a bed.
We looked at the Gladiator the other day (they had a dozen of them on our local lot) and it's a toy. No doubt an extraordinarily fun toy, and one I love to have myself, but a toy nonetheless. Can't imagine using it for day-to-day driving.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
54 Posts
Premium is recommended to achieve the advertised power. The fuel economy ratings are based on regular.

From the 2020 Ford Ranger Owner's Manual:

"Your vehicle is designed to operate on regular unleaded gasoline with a minimum pump (R+M)/2 octane rating of 87.

For best overall vehicle and engine performance, premium fuel with an octane rating of 91 or higher is recommended."


From Ford's website:

"Horsepower and torque ratings based on premium fuel per SAE J1349® standard. Your results may vary."
I guess I was mistaken on an online review. Glad you set it straight!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,108 Posts
How about that Ford paint, beautiful. Then, today a blue one passed me on the highway. Ford has their colors right, vivid.

If you go the beater truck route, I'd say a stripped Ranger in 2wd form hard to beat considering the fun factor of the base engine. If you get a stripped f-150 you get the 3.3, advantage Ranger.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,108 Posts
Glad Ford made the Ranger quick - better performance is a plus for the midsize truck market.

That said, my 2019 feels plenty quick. Pulling out onto a road I’m very confident that I’ll be at traffic speed in time, and passing power is great too. It ain’t slow!
 

·
Registered
2019 RT Ridgeline ~ Luna Silver
Joined
·
495 Posts
Ditto all the above comments.
Entertaining but had no impact in my consideration when shopping for the Ridgeline...

I only looked at the Ranger briefly. But a turbo 4 cylinder mated to a 10 speed seemed like allot of potential for problems...

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
410 Posts
0-60 is important to me, it's a big safety factor--maybe some of you don't ever have to merge onto a crowded freeway.

But they shouldn't have used the trip computer to determine gas mileage. I wonder if the Jeep and Ford are any more accurate than the Honda, which consistently reads about 1.5-2 m.p.g. higher than actual calculated mileage.

And I'd never get the Jeep anyway because of poor reliability, but surprisingly the Ford so far has shown better reliability than the Ridgeline. Now if they could just make it drive like a nice sedan, maybe I'd consider it next time.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,108 Posts
  • Like
Reactions: tmz

·
Registered
Joined
·
410 Posts
Edmunds clocked it at 6.9 seconds, 7.5 with traction control on: Performance Tested - 2017 Honda Ridgeline Long-Term Road Test

Don't know how that compares, but mine feels plenty quick; no problem at all getting to freeway speed in time.
Yes, I wasn't saying the Ridgeline isn't fast enough, but some people seemed to indicate they didn't care about the 0-60 time. I'd prefer something in the low 8 seconds, down to around 7. Below that I'd probably prefer better gas mileage rather than trying to get more off-the-line speed. I think the G1 was about 8.6 seconds for 0-60, although that may have changed over the years. Seemed a tad slow, and too slow for passing, especially at high altitudes, but the G2 seem much better at passing speeds too.

One of my gripes with Consumer Reports (although they are very helpful overall) is that they'll describe something with a 0-60 speed of around 9.5 -10 seconds as "peppy." And they think the Prius has plenty of power. I think the older Prius vehicles were around 11.4, but I don't remember for sure then they knocked off almost a second or so. I've read one model might do it in 10 seconds, but still a bit slow. In California we need to get up to freeway speed quickly, and be able to go up steep mountians at 65 m.p.h., any car that can't do that isn't "peppy."
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
972 Posts
So the Gladiator looks great in the commercials but when I see one in person it's super meh.

The Ranger is super narrow and cramped in person. Do not want.

The Ridge is still the class leader in trucks you use every day.
 
1 - 20 of 48 Posts
Top