I had a 2011 Ridgeline and it was a nice vehicle. I freaking loved the under bed storage compartment and the dual swing tailgate. The 4x4/AWD was nice and I had no issues in the snow.

The interior was a little cramped for my liking. For some reason I had a hell of a time trying to park that thing. It did have a larger turning radius than other vehicles I have owned.

I have a friend that has a 2012ish taco,
great pickup, rides well,
almost as big as my 2000 tundra,

but both of those are body on frame trucks, my V8 and his V6 get about the same mileage,


another friend has a first gen ridgeline,
he lives in the city, just needs to haul mulch etc etc, and absolutely loves it,

rides well (I've on cross town rides with him) on city streets, very quiet (for a honda) on the highway,

if I was replacing my Tundra, honestly I would look at one ,

I had one of the first year ones. Loved so much about it, with one exception.

The turning radius just sucked. Numbers aside, it just wasn't fun to park compared to even other pickup trucks.

If you want a truck then get a real truck. If you want an suv then get an suv. If you need to occasionally haul things then get a trailer for the suv. The ridgeline and avalanche don’t do either very well. You’d be better served getting one or the other

quote:

Originally posted by limblessbiff:
If you want a truck then get a real truck. If you want an suv then get an suv. If you need to occasionally haul things then get a trailer for the suv. The ridgeline and avalanche don’t do either very well. You’d be better served getting one or the other

Oh brother.

Before I got into Tundra's I had an Avalanche and it was one of the most useful trucks (for me) I ever had. 8' covered bed when I wanted it, short box open or covered bed, and full back seat.

quote:

Originally posted by limblessbiff:
If you want a truck then get a real truck...

Reminds me of those people who go on and on about Harley’s being the only motorcycle worth riding.

Called it.

Ground clearance Suburu Forrester - 9 inches


Ground clearance Honda Ridgeline - Was suppose to be 8 but I was told that they report only 7-1/2 inches

The 1st Gen Ridgelines had a comparable ground clearance to the Forester (8.2 vs. 8.7)

But the 2nd Gen Ridgelines lost almost a full inch during the redesign.

I'm a truck guy. I've owned and driven a half ton Ford F150 for a bit over twenty years. I've hauled and towed a lot over those years, way more than a Ridgeline could ever imagine towing or hauling. That having been said, the Ridgeline, although not a truck, is an exceptional vehicle for the audience it was designed for. When your primary focus is ride comfort and economy, with your secondary focus being on hauling home your Home Depot scores, the Ridgeline is almost impossible to beat. I drove one and the ride quality and drive-ability were exceptional. Way better than any 'truck' I've ever driven (and I've driven a bunch). Need to haul 15 bags of mulch, or a dozen 2x4's, or your lawnmower to the shop, no problem. Need to haul your rear end to work five days a week or out to dinner on the weekend, piece a cake. Need to tow your jet skis to the lake and back. Again, you get the idea.

IMO the only 'real' problem with the Ridgeline is how other people (including Honda) position it. It's not a truck, but rather, a hybrid if you will, that will meet the needs of a certain segment of buyers very well. I'd never worn anyone off of the Ridgeline as I think its a terrific vehicle. I'd just encourage anyone looking at it to carefully quantify what they are looking to accomplish with it.

quote:

Originally posted by mojojojo:

quote:

Originally posted by limblessbiff:
If you want a truck then get a real truck...

Reminds me of those people who go on and on about Harley’s being the only motorcycle worth riding.

Probably the same people who say the only caliber worth having is the .45 ACP

I drove the Ridgeline before buying my v6 Taco.

I felt it drove more like a car, which was good on the road. The payload was ample at 1500 lbs in the bed (and longer than the Taco short bed), but the hitch tow maximum was 5,000 on their rear wheel version. I would give a clear win to the Ridgeline in comfort and refinement, but the back seat had more room than the Taco (which was about 4 inches).

Also, you can find reviews of people who often tow either small boats where they say the truck struggled in towing. I know this from a friend that takes his (2016 Ridgeline) hunting, and he tows his and a friends ATV (Mule/ Gator) and says that it really struggles on hills. I bought my Tacoma for towing, and the old adage holds true that you take your listed maximum tow weight and subtract 1,000 lbs to give you the max you should tow. I had 5,500 lbs on the ball three times in the last week, and I'd never pull more than that again, especially not in the mountains.

For me it came down to four things:
Price - the Honda dealers were not willing to come down on Ridgeline RTL All Wheel Drive Crew Cab prices, and they were on the SR5 4x4 Crew Cab. Also, the Tacoma starts at almost $2,000 less than the Ridgeline. At the end of the day there was almost $3,600 between the two when I had negotiated the price.

Towing - I knew I needed at least 5,000 capacity, and both had it, but the Tacoma had some to spare.

Resale price - The Ridgeline seems to have a different depreciation curve than the Tacoma. The used market for trucks right now is pretty messed up, but the Tacoma has held the title for resale value for close to a decade. When I was shopping for used Tacomas, I must had called fifteen private sale Tacoma owners, and all but two were sold before I had called. One guy told me that he put the listing in Auto Trader, and he had three calls within two hours, and the buyer showed up with a certified bank check the next day.

Aftermarket parts and shop access - Almost everybody has aftermarket parts for the Tacoma, but it seemed much harder for the Ridgeline. Also, my local Honda repair shop does not work on the (mechanical needs) Ridgeline. I asked why, and he said he has only had two people bring them in, and said it was not worth it to invest time for such a low volume vehicle when he has a backlog of Accords, Odyssey's and Civic's . He does oil and transmission fluid changes, but nothing mechanical. The same can not be said about the Tacoma - they seems like the Lego version of vehicles.

In the end, if you want a bigger back seat, more refined cabin, and better ride with an ample bed capacity, go with the Ridgeline. If you need to tow anything over 4,500 lbs, want more off-road capability, a lower upfront cost, and higher residual value, go with the Tacoma.

Well, I saw a Ridgeline in the parking lot last night. Man, that bed is small....

I am now looking at more of a full, half ton size truck. The search continues.

I helped one get unstuck in the sand near Ramp 4 at Oregon Inlet the other day. Didn't have to hook up to it, just advised the occupants to lower the air pressure and get out and push. Worked as usual.

When you're bulked up with a sweater and a jacket plus Thanksgiving dinner in your belly, the Honda interior will seem to be closing in on you.

I drove the smallest pickup on the market almost 30 years ago (for a decade) then upsized to a 'compact' in '01, and now drive a full-size ½ ton regular cab pickup. Wish it was even wider.

quote:

Originally posted by PowerSurge:

quote:

Originally posted by limblessbiff:
If you want a truck then get a real truck. If you want an suv then get an suv. If you need to occasionally haul things then get a trailer for the suv. The ridgeline and avalanche don’t do either very well. You’d be better served getting one or the other

Oh brother.

You knew it was gonna happen as soon as someone saw “Ridgeline.”

quote:

Originally posted by Black92LX:

quote:

Originally posted by PowerSurge:

quote:

Originally posted by PossibleZombie:
I had a 2017 RT-L AWD for about six months but traded it in. Mine had electrical gremlins that caused it to accelerate on it's own when on cruise control. Tried to get it fixed and they couldn't after a few tries so I traded it for an Accord.

The truck was comfortable and drove well but I didn't feel safe in it when it would suddenly accelerate 10 or 15 mph all on it's own.

I’m curious....why didn’t you make Honda buy it back?

Hopefully they just traded him straight.

I do have to say I do like the looks of the new generation Ridgeline. They have the Aussie UTE look.

Though I would go Tacoma over the Ridgeline personally.
I am a simple guy especially when it comes to trucks. All I want is 4 full doors, 4wd/AWD, and a backup camera.
The cheapest Ridgeline with AWD starts at 35k the Tacoma starts at 32k. Plus there is far more support for the Taco.

I got back what I paid for it plus a very deep discount on the Accord. I came out well and the dealership took care of me, no need to fight for a buyback.

quote:

Originally posted by Leemur:

quote:

Originally posted by PowerSurge:

quote:

Originally posted by limblessbiff:
If you want a truck then get a real truck. If you want an suv then get an suv. If you need to occasionally haul things then get a trailer for the suv. The ridgeline and avalanche don’t do either very well. You’d be better served getting one or the other

Oh brother.

You knew it was gonna happen as soon as someone saw “Ridgeline.”

Where you gonna put the gooseneck ball in that thing, Sonny?

I bought a Taco earlier this year after looking at the Ridgeline and Frontier. I was wanting a truck that I can take up to the mountains a bit and have some offroad fun so the choice was clear.
My next truck (in 10 years or so) will definitely be the Ridgline as long as I'm done with the semi-serious off road stuff.