Paul:: you are so right! and the perfict van would be a GMC/Chewvy 1/2t AWD! comes with the 5.3 you can get 4:10 w/auto locking diff. in rear, and tow 9,000lbs. I know someone that has one and he get 16-20mpg m/t with the crewscntl on and 12-16 towinf a boat or Airstream trl! and on top of all that can seat 12!!!. But just like the Honda it has no 2spd transfer case, just one speed, however you can get a Quigley conversion van with all the same drivtrain as the pickups! and more ground clearance, but you will loose out on the milege p/g, but will have a 3/4-1t van that can tow 12,500! and even get a diesel engine if you want! for around the same $$ as a loaded Ridgeline.

The first post had it right: The Ridgeline failed not just because it’s ugly or odd… but because the fuel economy is only so-so and the price is too high.

The new global T6 Ranger with a turbo 4 or a turbo 4 diesel would suit most buyers truck needs--but Ford won’t sell that truck in the USA or Canada, their 2 largest markets. Dumb, huh?

https://www.facebook.com/pages/Ford-bring-the-new-world-Ranger-to-the-States/176237855779573?ref=hl

Honda for the most part has always made good products. The Ridgeline is a good vehicle but it is more than what I would want to pay, the bed is too small for what I need, and the mpgs are so so. For a lot of suburbanites this would be a good compromise vehicle and would fit well into their lifestyles. There have been similiar vehicles like this that are either gone or going like the Ford Explorer Sports Track and the Chevy Avalance. I know people that own these and really like them but for most truck owners they would not work. As for Honda's quality and reputation it is golden. I would agree with Rich I would think the Global T-6 Ranger would suit most buyers but that does not appear to be on Ford's future NA product offerings.

@Rich -- When I was looking for a truck or utility vehicle to buy (I live in Southeastern WI), I wanted two things 1) Decent gas mileage and 2) a versatile vehicle that wasn't too large and my wife would feel comfortable with driving. I kept reading about the Fords being released elsewhere in the world and was envious. It was truly the truck I wanted and needed.

I love my Ridgeline, it does everything someone with mostly freeway driving / suburban truck applications needs. I can haul my kayaks to one of the 7 lakes, my boat, coolers, wood, foliage, etc without a problem. I know others posted about it having problems in mud or snow, but I have not seen that. Up North I was much more maneuverable and able than both the Colorado and RWD Ranger/S10 my other family members had. More room, better mileage, awesomely over-engineered bed, and Honda's rock-solid build was why I bought my truck used at the same price point as a Tacoma (my third choice).

@J.C the Mechanic - "Most people wont admit that the vehicle they bought is junk !"

Really.
I have no problems admitting that the Dodge Grand Caravan my wife and I owned was junk!

I've never met a person who has tried to hide the fact that their vehicle was a pile of crap.

Most of the people I know own a Toyota or Honda product of some kind. Many say they changed over because of problems with the so called "domestics" and have never been disappointed by that choice.

In your eyes, would that mean the "domestics" are junk?

I know you would say NO.
I've read your posts before under other names. In your eyes, anyone buying a Japanesee badged vehicle is an unpatriotic, over-educated fop, who looks down on the working man, and has been brain washed into believing anything foreign is superior.

Have I covered all of your beliefs?
(At least in relation to foreign badged cars and their owners)

@Lou-I will admit that my 85 Mercury Lynx (an Escort want to be as my mechanic so aptly called it) was a piece of junk. It looked ok but it was sluggish and it was a maintenance headache, but on the other had my brother gave it to me. That was the only vehicle I ever owned that I could say was a piece of junk and it was American made. Now if they would of sold the Mahindra in NA and if I would of bought that then I am sure it would have been a piece of junk but somehow I was not that infatuated with the Mahindra so I doubt I would have bought one. I honestly can say that all of my other vehicles I have have owned I have been more than satisfied with. I myself have had a Honda and Mitsubishi and had great service out of them. But as you can attest to I have had many people that I have worked with that had horrible experiences with the older Chrysler and Dodge minivans. The Chrysler products have been much better in the last few years and I have known people with the later model minivans that have had excellent service out of them.

@Jeff S - my first truck needed quite a few repairs but I was 22 at the time, spent most of my time offroad, and beat the crap out of it. I jumped it, towed stuff that I shouldn't of towed, went places that I probably shouldn't. I never viewed that truck as a pile of junk. I had a good relationship with the service manager so it was repaired under extended warranty. I kept it 7 years. The guy I sold it to had it for 6 years. He babied it and never had a problem. I was happy to see it had a good home. That proved that it was the mechanohuman interface that caused the problems ;)

@Lou-My 85 Lynx was treated well but it had close to 90k on it when I got it. The pre 91 Escorts were not as good as the later ones which were based on the Mazda 323 which was an outstanding little car. Our 94 Escort wagon was a great little car. The 85 Lynx I would have love to see in a demolition derby (especially the Crazy 8s).

I really don't understand this vehicle. I like Honda autos. I think they are one of the best companies for design and reliability, but this thing ... I'm not too concerned about looks. its the lousy mpg, high price and mediocre capabilities that put me off. I test drove one when I was last looking to purchase a truck and thought it handled like a tank.

Its like Honda decided to take the worst aspects of some trucks (oversized, poor mpg, poor handling) and add things that people don't want in a truck (no BOF, FWD bias, weird unibody bed with sloped rail). I like some of their new design ideas for this vehicle but I think they just couldn't commit to being either a really good truck or an affordable, economical alternative. To me they ended up being neither and failing overall.

And no full-size spare??? That's unacceptable. My old Honda CR-V (an example of a good Honda) had a full-sized spare.

@Matthew in MS --And what you just stated about the Ridgeline is similiar to what has been said of the Ford Explorer Sports Trac and the Chevy Avalanche. As for the quality and reliability of these vehicles they have all been good. For some families these vehicles work but for many of us true truck lovers not so much. The question has been can you sell these type of vehicles in enough quantities to justify continuing to produce them. Ford no longer makes the Sports Trac and 2013 is the last year for the Chevy Avalanche. It remains to be seen if Honda continues the Ridgeline or if it goes the way of the Element which was a quality product with not very attractive styling that never caught on. I have yet to meet an owner of an Element that had anything but compliments to say about the Element but it was a hard sell to most Honda buyers. I am not trying to bash these products just state what is fact.

@Jeff S - you make a valid point. People expect things to be a certain way, that seems to hold especially true with pickups. One has to give Honda kudos for trying something different, but it is too different for people to accept on a mass scale. Most would rather buy a 1/2 ton with 400 hp even though they don't need it. Traditions run deep in the truck world.

@tj:

I hauled 5000 lbs across Canada (5500 km) without any troubles during my recent move. I purchased a 2008 exl with 56k km on it and it has had zero problems. I have never taken my sister to las Vegas, nor do I find that appealing hahahah. You Internet troll. I would not call the vehicle a pickup but it should be classified as a SUT. I really find it funny how the vehicle offends big three pickup drivers so much. It is a top ranked used vehicle and top ranked new vehicle on consumer reports. It is hard on gas for what it is, but very reliable. The vtm4 system is really good in mud believe it or not.

@dill A friend of mine bought one used and got it stuck the second day he had it in a rut made by a half ton and burnt the vtm4 fluid up so I dont think they are that good in mud

Look at the big picture... See any heavy duty Honda trucks out there in the world (not just North America)? Honda is not a truck making company like Ford, GM, Diamler, etc. They don't have the heavy duty know how. They started as a small car company. The Ridgeline, Pilot, and Odyssey is the biggest vehicle platform they have ever made. The transmissions in these vehicles cannot hold up to the V6 engines torque and weight of these vehicles. That is why all of these vehicles transmissions start to fail at 50-75K miles. I know from having both a Pilot and Odyssey where both transmissions have failed. You also cannot completely change the transmission fluid when doing the change because Honda knows that a purge will damage the spool valves. So, you can change out about 3 qts. of the burnt up fluid but that's it. To get it really clean you have to do 2-3 changes in 10K miles. Honda also covered up their transmission problems as much as possible. Talk to any mechanic at Honda and they'll tell you their junk as long as their boss isn't around. If you want a real truck that can haul a bed load or tow, don't look at the Ridgeline. As a consumer, I can't believe how people think Honda makes good vehicles. I'll never buy or recommend a Honda to anyone after our experience. Easy to research "Honda transmission failures, recalls, online. See for yourself.

@Hondanomore - "THey don't have the heavy duty know how?"
Wow.
Honda builds Jet airplanes, jet engines, and robotics as well as motorcycles and cars. They make the most internal combustion engined powered vehicles in the world.
I do not know anyone with the problems you describe and those people own the same vehicles you do.
If you had problems like you stated, that is rather unfortunate. The problem is that you loose all credibility with the rest of your rant.

I am currently contemplating buying this or. A Tacoma. I like the riegeline because the back seat is larger and I appreciate the way it folds up and out of the way. I also like how it is front wheel drive . What I don't like is how heavy it is and how small the engine is and how wrong the transmission is geared. I prefer low end torque in a truck. The most I will haul is a trailer full of leaves or luggage for a quick get away plus bikes and strollers. But if I ever wanted to pull a shrub stump I would second guess the ridgeline. The Tacoma is less passenger friendly but does everything else pretty darn well. ......... but I do want my kids comfortable. Don't know what to do. I guess which ever I can get a better deal on.

Re: Honda builds Jet airplanes, jet engines, and robotics as well as motorcycles and cars.

Heavy duty know was referring to heavy duty vehicles, e.g. trucks, buses, vans, etc. An airplane, motorcycle and a robot is not a truck, does not use a truck engine, does not tow or haul heavy loads. Honda may make the most internal combustion engines in the world when you count, motorcycles, lawnmowers, and portable generators but I don't see them near number one for automobile sales. The largest engine they have ever built is a V6! So my point is heavy and light duty trucks & vehicles. Get it? The transmission used in the Odyssey, Pilot, & Ridgeline is same you can find in Accord or other mid-size Honda/Acura sedans. Now look at the Tacoma, for example, and you will see a light duty truck with power-train designed for truck use.

For more background, we went to Honda for their reputation of reliability, which has been built on the civic, accord, etc. We had the same expectation for the Pilot and Odyssey. Unfortunately, it has not been the case with the transmission recalls, failures, etc. that have plagued our vehicles. From what we've learned, the transmissions in these cars were just not built to handle the extra weight and torque. Maybe they've improved them since 2008? Any Honda mechanics want to comment? Oh, and yes, when our transmission started to fail at 55K miles, (just after warranty), our Honda mechanic's advise was to dump it as fast as you can, it's going to fail soon - known problem! The alternative was to spend $5.5K to replace at our cost.

And, do you know how frustrating it is to have your transmission fluid changed at the recommended interval and be told at your next oil change service that you need to have it changed again because it is still burnt up because they could only exchange about 3 qts. of fluid? This is the reality of our very "credible" experience. That good enough for you Lou?

@Hondanomore - it is unfortunate that you had problems. This site has too many trolls that spout BS that it is often hard to tell a legitamate post form a troll post. It is unfortunate that you have had problems, I haven't encountered people with those problems in Honda vehicles in the size range you described. Honda does not have a poor reputation with any of their products. Heavy duty know how isn't neccesary to build a quality product. You do not need to know how to build an 18 wheeler to build a pickup. I'm not saying that problems do not exist. My apologies.

With improper maintenance any transmission will fail. Due to not being able to be flushed the tranny fluid needs to be filled and drained 3 times for a full fluid change. It takes about a half an hour to drain a third of the fluid (that is all that will come out) once. And this needs to be done every 30k miles. I changed the fluid 3 times with full synthetic ATF before my towing trip. Upon my return home the dealer manager to do an a136 service on the ridgeline inside 2 hours. I did not question the dealer, as I knew my ATF was still in good condition. But I would imagine this would have something to do with ridgeline transmission failure. There are people on the ridgeline forums that have done 300k km with only a timing belt change and regular brake upkeep.

My sisters Ranger dropped the tranny at 60k miles. That being said it did not receive a drop of new ATF since she drove it off the lot. The brake pedal also went to the floor during towing (no brakes), but that is a seperate story.

The transmission is good but loses longevity when abused it seems (just like any other brand).

Here's an example of many articles you can find:

January 8th, 2011 - "Honda Transmission Problems Seem to Persist." - New York Times

With URL:

http://wheels.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/01/08/honda-transmission-problems-seem-to-persist/

Sometimes the truth hurts.....

http://townhall-talk.edmunds.com/direct/view/.f0fa11e

@Hondanomore

Consumer reports gives the ridgeline transmission a top ranking for transmission reliability. In fact the ridgeline wins the category overall and is on their recommended list. I know they messed up on the 2003 van transmission. And the ridgeline tranny is not a clone to that model. This is a copy and paste from car and driver "Added to the well-known five-speed automatic from the Pilot and MDX are higher-capacity clutches, a new torque converter, and a transmission-oil cooler. "

Nice one with the truth hurts comment though. Do a little more research before you make smart comments.

This "truck" is awesome. Why? Because it is a Honda and Honda makes the best motor on the planet. I just traded in a Pilot for this because of the bed. I don't need a "real" pick up truck. This is an SUV with a bed instead of a hatchback and once you realize that you can stop putting it down for not being a real truck, lol. I need a comfy ride I can put my kids in, but also be able to go to the dump and haul this and that. This is perfect. if I was a contractor, I would go for a regular truck, but this is great for someone who wants an SUV they can do a bit more with.

I've had my '06 Honda Ridgeline since new and have over 100K miles on it now with absolutely no major problems. It is still tight and a pleasure to drive. I don't need a "real truck" or "work truck" so this is a perfect fit for me. This is not a small truck but is not real big either...just right. I've never changed a flat tire on the road, always carry a small air compressor and can of "fix a flat" for that so the small spare is fine for me. I really like some of the neat features it has like the trunk tho you have to be careful that you don't fill the bed and then want something out of the trunk. I have found it very good in the snow and ice and even in mild "off-roading". I would have liked to see a few things common in bigger trucks like the ability to put on a cap or a rack. Better gas mileage would be nice, but it is a 4WD truck.
The size is just right for me. The new Fords and GMs are way too big.
I have enjoyed owning this truck and like its "distinctive styling".

I have a Ranger, and I'm thinking about a Ridgeline. The comments here just blow my mind: so illogical and opinionated.

The biggest complaint I hear about the RL is that it's not a "real truck". What is that? Do you mean a big, overweight, rear-wheel drive beast built in two parts on a ladder frame that bends and twists on every bump, bounces passengers around like a super ball, and spins out on even a little snow? The RL unibody construction makes the entire vehicle a single unit that resists twisting and flexing, resulting in fewer squeaks and greater overall strength, with less material, and better handling. Some people want the benefits of a truck, without the truck ride and handling.

The next biggest complaint I hear is that it's ugly. Well, I think most trucks are ugly. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder; and is completely subjective, thus an invalid comparison.

Another complaint I frequently hear is about the in-bed trunk, and that it would be inaccessible when the vehicle is loaded. Well, duh. So, how's the lockable trunk on your F-150 or Tacoma? Oh, there's not one! There is no comparable feature on any other vehicle, so it's an invalid comparison.

Finally, another common complaint is that it's not a "manly" vehicle. This is an argument for those who are so insecure in their manhood that they have to have big, mean-looking vehicles to compensate. Those who are secure in their manhood will buy what they want, what works best for them, and not rely on what others tell them is masculine.

The RL is classified as a *mid-size" pickup, therefore comparisons to full-size trucks are irrelevant and invalid. But, comparing the RL to the other mid-sized pickups: Tacoma, Ranger, Frontier, etc, the RL's stats are similar to, if not better than, the competition.

I do, however, see a few complaints that are valid:
- MPG could be higher
- price could be lower

Otherwise, Honda products have consistently proven to be top-quality, reliable, comfortable and capable vehicles.

And, yes, I wouldn't necessarily classify the RL as a truck so much as an SUV with a bed. It's marketing and classification in the market have hurt its sales more than anything--except possibly the ill-bred jerks than have to express their manliness with a "real truck."

Reminds me of the sign a saw not long ago: "Nice truck, sorry about your tiny d!@k."

Love my rl. Where is an AWD big three truck to compare it to?

Compare side impact safety ratings and tell me what truck you want your kids to learn to drive in.

I have an 06 Ridgeline with 300 000km, and its still going, bodies a little worse for wear, and it burns a bit of oil but what can you expect from a gas engine with that many k's? I've had the bed loaded way over capacity (900lb ATV, and all the free space filled with hardie board (about 400lbs)and the trunk full of bud, all while towing two more 900lb ATV's, 2 Dirtbikes and my boat (its a custom trailer if you are wondering). Did about 300 or so trips like that so thats saying something for the ridge