The first RL was a unique and capable truck, I can't wait to see what this thing will look/be like.

Honda...stick to cars.

With the world's infatuation with trucks like the Hilux and Ranger, it would not only make American business sense, but a global sales sense if the truck was more traditional.

Honda had to have thought they could give Americans what they needed all the while forgetting that being a 'Murican is about what you want and not what you need.

Now that they know that Americans are only gonna buy a "real" pickup, they might as well produce a global model.

I'm waiting for Honda to come out with a Full size body on frame 1/2 ton, that would be killer.

The Ridgeline has a 1550 Payload that's as good as some 1/2 tons especially if you compare to one from 10-15 years ago.

But it's a front-wheel drive mini-van... How do you learn from that?

@ Ben

"I'm waiting for Honda to come out with a Full size body on frame 1/2 ton, that would be killer."

If Honda did that it'd take DECADES for the Big 2 to catch up (centuries for little fiat ram), even if it were based on a mini'van and all.

1550 payload seems to be in the range of a modern well equipped 1/2 ton. Dodge being below and Chevy being higher. I'm not a fan, but choices and competition is a good thing.

The silhouette reminds me of the new Nissan Navara.

In the Tacoma related articles I see nothing but complaints that Toyota has no competition in the mid-size market and therefore the Tacoma has not changed or evolved.

So why are people talking about half-tons in a Ridgeline article instead of rooting for Honda to come to market with something that would actually give the Tacoma a run for its money?

I'd never buy either of them but it'd be cool to see what Toyota could do with the Taco if it felt threatened in some way.

It seems the ridgeline was built for the kind of guy that normally wouldn't own a pickup, but wants the capability to haul a few dirty things around without getting his suv dirty. The current ridgeline clearly wasn't built for heavy work the way traditional pickups are. I'm ok with that, but wouldn't consider buying a ridgeline for my farm for even one second. It just wouldn't have the capability I need. One look at the bed and you can tell it wasn't made for my kind of work. From the looks of the new ridgeline, maybe they are going to try to appeal to those who actually use their truck for heavy work. Honda has a great reputation for reliability and they make arguably the most reliable atvs. I will buy nothing but honda atvs as they are simply MUCH more durable than can am, polaris, suzuki, kawasaki, or yamaha. I know honda powersports is separate from honda vehicles, but they could really benefit from some input from the honda powersports engineers when designing a pickup truck and that would go a long ways if they used that in their marketing as well. I've always been a fan of the big three "american" brands, but I'd buy a honda truck if it was built with durability in mind and wasn't too expensive compared to other options.

This new RL will be made of an aluminum uni body, and be more like a minivan chassis. It will be a good thing! strong new age and much needed for MPG. I just drove a g37x 2012. put a set of tires on for a local store owner. This little car had everything in the drivetrain that i would want for a small truck. it was rough, ballsy and responsive! Heavy pedal, low end torque with excellent revs, over 7k. If the engine could be anything like that little gem they are on the right track. More so than any of the others. Maybe if gm has the 3.6 calibrated anything like this in the Colorado. They are going to be a huge hit! dont doubt that just go try one of these g37's i drive alot of cars, new benz 350's cadillacs, lexus, many many american junks that arent worthy of their asking price. the g37 engine and transmission left an impression the other day. if a small motor can keep revs low and still feel like it has that torque but snap to life and hit 7200 rpm like the snap of your fingers with awd. what the heck are the american companies waiting for??? i am very impressed with that engine and transmission the rough around the edge feeling is perfect for a truck! JUST PERFECT.

@big al
I think all1 made a very reasonable comment. Most reasonable people would agree with his assessment. I don't know why you have to call him a troll and "full of $hit" and loser because of that comment. I can't believe you are accusing HIM of being a troll because he shared an honest opinion about the ridgeline? IF anybody is being a troll it is you. I'm pretty sure a ridgeline can't haul 3,080 pounds. WHere did you get that number? Looks like 1546 is maximum payload capacity. So you really made yourself look dumb with that comment. Aside from the low payload capacity, the ridgeline just doesn't have a very accessible or very large bed. That's the main reason it is not good for work IMO. By the way, your comments are really annoying to read when you have a large space between every line.

The interior of the old one is cramped and the bed is very small. Those are the reasons I never considered one. That said, I thought the trunk and dual action tailgate were nice ideas.

My 1969 Impala wagon had a dual-action tailgate. Nothing new there.

I'm looking forward to the redesign, just out of curiosity and because I believe competition benefits the consumer, instead of badmouthing something that hasn't been released yet. I don't even have a use for a truck smaller than a half-ton but I still like to see what the newest idea is!

So the Ridgeline was a car with a truck bed. So what? I've seen a lot of families with kids hauling bikes and picking up plants at the home improvement store, which was apparently what it was designed for. Sorry it won't pull your gooseneck, but that doesn't make it any less useful for its target buyer.

As far as the whole midsize segment goes I'm very interested to see all the new and potentially new contenders jump in, where there has been just the Tacoma/Frontier sitting stagnant.

Are you really an engineer or do you just make absurd statements on the internet with broken links as your sources?

Can't wait to buy a reliable vehicle and get rid of my crap F150!

It's a 2010 and it's a piece of junk!

@Big Al

Per Honda's website, the Ridgeline can haul between 1486 and 1547 lbs. It can tow 5000 lbs.

To convert to Metric, divide by 2.2
http://www.honda. com/newsandviews/article.aspx?id=7365-en

@Big Al
Why is it that you come here to spew your poison and then when you get called out you play victim? The Ridgeline CANNOT carry 3080lbs, yet you refuse to verify your information and berate anyone who contradicts you.

It is hardly worth engaging with you. I don't know what your problem is but whatever is the issue, learn to use good information.

I wonder if that is a troll pretending to be Big Al.

I have to give props to Honda for having the balls to strike out in a different direction with the Ridgeline.

With that being said, It was not a success because people do not like big change from the familiar.

My wife and I looked at one 5 years ago. The interior was nice and it rode very well. It had decent power as well.

I did not like the C pillar and the slope of the box sides. Accessories for it like canopies and cargo racks were very expensive. The box was too small for what I wanted.

If Honda goes with a more tradition shape and adds length to the box as well as superior mpg it could do much better than the past Ridgeline.

I love how so many of you guys just fight with each other. What a waste of time.

Honda can fix their truck by doing the following.
1st they make it look a truck not this unibody crap your a truck not a crossover.
2. dump a the 60 degree v6 for a 90 degree inline 4 and inline 6 light-diesel. Come on Honda you got V-tec magics and other engineering ideas, heck you can keep cost down of the if you use those engines on them Honda boats.
3. Make it 4wd not Awd, add center locking
4. Use the Rubbermaid technology, and rubbermaid the hell of it down in under for "off-road appeal"
5. 6sp Auto-tragic and 6sp Manualtastic

but honda will never use this idea, there gonna make civic into a truck.

Honda lives off of Consumer Reports
The Ridgeline was built and designed to impress the people from Consumer Reports.
The proof is Consumer Reports trashed the 2012 Honda Civic, and the following year Honda changed the Civic to EXACTLY what Consumer Reports recommended.
Too many people buy a vehicle based on how Consumer Reports rates it more so if they like that vehicle or not, (meaning they may not like the Ridgeline or its not what they need but they buy it cause Consumer Reports says its the best)

Unless properly executed it will fizzle just like the previous one.

@Lou BC--That is a troll using Big Al's name. All1 and Beebe made some very constructive comments. I like Honda products as well including their outdoor power equipment but I would like to see them come out with a compact or midsize truck that is more truck like.

I think that Honda has lost their way. They still make reliable vehicles, but they lost whatever spark and passion they use to have.

They made some great cars in the 80's, 90's--great engineering in even their pedestrian cars that made them better than the sum of their parts.

Today, excluding their powersports line-up and small engines, I can't think of a single Honda I would look at if I was in the market.

@Dav--Good points, that has been a criticism of Honda in that they are concentrating on making a jet plane that they have yet to sell and letting one of their main core products neglected. Of all the Honda vehicles their Accord, Civic, and CRV are their bread winners with the rest of their vehicles either losing ground or stagnant. Honda needs to get back to the business of making groundbreaking and higher quality vehicles. Don't get me wrong, they still make good vehicles but they have rested on their reputation.

@Beebe: "It seems the ridgeline was built for the kind of guy that normally wouldn't own a pickup, but wants the capability to haul a few dirty things around without getting his suv dirty. The current ridgeline clearly wasn't built for heavy work the way traditional pickups are. I'm ok with that, but wouldn't consider buying a ridgeline for my farm for even one second. It just wouldn't have the capability I need. One look at the bed and you can tell it wasn't made for my kind of work."

Very good; you realize that it is not suitable for YOUR work. But does that mean it's not suitable for ANY work? Keep in mind that this thing came out in direct response to the Chevy Avalanche, which looks very similar and really isn't all that different in size. What's more interesting is that it was the advent of the Avalanche that triggered this huge crew cab surge since while they were available before the Avalanche, they weren't nearly as common. That's also when full-sized pickup trucks really started getting the luxury amenities they now carry as compared to the more work-centric interiors they used to have. In other words, the Avalanche and the Ridgeline effectively ushered in the era of putting real comfort and family-car capability into what used to be strictly a working-style vehicle.

Meanwhile, they also proved that not EVERYONE is concerned with out heavy a load it can carry/tow so much as having a need to carry things they don't WANT to carry inside a car/suv/cuv.

I can already tell by the silhouette its not going to be successful. Looks like a Dodge Dakota. They sold about 12k in their last year only a couple k more than the Ridgeline.

Lou and Jeff S i agree with you too , that this not the normal Big Al ,because the Big AL i see on here normally brings more intelligent information and it take lot for him to lose his cool and bring up the word troll . I thank that this Big Al is a phony.

The one thing I like about the Ridgeline is that it has plenty of head and leg room. I agree with Lou that it rides well and is not too bad to drive. The bed is not a functional and I do not care much for the sloping sides. I even think they could get by with the same platform just make the bed more usable and better mpgs.

@Louis o--The remarks using Big Al's name just do not match what Big Al would say. I have read articles on this site and commented for the past 6 years and I know Big Al well enough to know those remarks are out of character for him and that he would never write those. Big Al will back up what he says with facts and would provide links. We can disagree with someone's viewpoint but respect them and for the most part that is what Big Al would do.

Wrong and shows how much you know about BAFO. That is something BAFO has already stated, but somebody pulled one of his posts and reposted it and switched Colorado for Ridgeline. It likely could have been BAFO himself trying to stir up the blog again. He does not back up what he says and if he did he would not have used a foreign Colorado without a bed in his example against the heaviest F-250.

Yes. That was a BAFO post. He is playing games again because he likes avoiding reality and likes playing the victim. BAFO, You are divorced, right?

@roadwhale.
I don't disagree with anything you said. Obviously it was made for work. Light work. I think the current ridgeline has a purpose for some people, as stated in my post. It just doesn't appeal to people that do a lot of work. The same can be said for the avalanche. I have never seen a farmer with an avalanche or a ridgeline. You'd also be very unlikely to spot one of them at a construction site, etc. The design of their beds is not conducive to loading or carrying stuff because of the c pillars, tall bed sides, and small beds. The low payload is only a small factor for me. I just hope that honda's next truck IS built like a traditional pickup that can be used for work...lots of work.

@Ken
You are correct. That is an excellent analysis of BAFO.

I googled one of his frequent posts "Quit the crap, really...", and it returns over 180 links to PUTC articles. This guy is really a nutcase. Furthermore, other posts he has made are copy and pasted from other articles. At least two posts he made in this article are ones he has made before.

Even though he may not have made all of those posts himself (people posting as him), he still was the one who posted these statements the first time around and therefore they reflect his views. As I mentioned, he's quite a nutjob.

If he doesn't like people reposting his crap then he needs to quit the crap, really.

I guess I'll post this here too since All1 posted in both threads.

Ken and All1 are correct. The "3080 lb you are one full of $%^ individual" post was started by BAFO when he was trying to and was unsuccessful in arguing with Denver Mike that the Colorado was more capable than a F-250. Google it and you can find the original post and many more kooky rants like it.

There are a few that like to defend BAFO or say he would never say something like that or have those views, but they are either blind or complicent in BAFO's trolling games. The reason? They are part of the small truck-diesel-anti-USA mafia/alliance or whatever they want to call it and that's how they operate.

Here is the link to BAFO's original post that started this. I just found it on google:

http://news.pickuptrucks.com/2013/04/former-gm-exec-says-fuel-rules-will-boost-vehicle-costs-by-5000.html

"To Denver Mike's credit he found out that BAFO was using the best case scenario for the Holden Colorado stripper regular cab model in 4x2 without a bed and the worst case for the F-250 4x4 crewcab long bed with a diesel. That just shows BAFO's bias and games he plays right there. The F-250 can haul up to 4,240 lbs with a bed and with US DOT regulations.

To quote Denver Mike:

If you were to use a fully loaded, 4X4 Colorado with a diesel engine as a "payload example", more similar to the King Ranch, it would have about a 1,000 lbs payload, when adjusted for conservative US payload ratings and with a bed installed.

Of course, the base-stripper reg cab, 2wd cab & chassis Colorado with the gas engine in your "theoretical" and "best case" payload, would also be the worst case scenario for a best "towing example" Colorado.
For that you would use a double cab Colorado model with the diesel.

You're need to be all over the place to try to prove your nonsense BS.

When it comes to the "35 MPG hwy" figure, you're back to the stripper Colorado, cab & chassis, but with a diesel engine (if 35 MPG hwy is even possible).

This is exactly the kind of "apples to ORANGES(?)" comparisons you use that makes you a joke around here..."

Posted by: Denver|||Mike | Apr 21, 2013 12:48:43 AM

I concur. BAFO is a joke.

I really liked the look of the Ridgeline and was interested in them until my brother had bought one new a number of years ago, within a few months there were rust signs in a number of spots on the body. This really turned me away and not looking back since.

There is no anti-American truck alliance or small truck alliance. Anyone who wants a smaller truck is labeled as this. I am for freedom of choice meaning that a consumer should be able to choose more than one size. No one is forcing those who want a bigger truck to buy a smaller truck, but some of those who are for bigger trucks want to force everyone else to buy a full size truck. Some of us don't care about how much payload or the towing capacity of a truck, if we did we would skip the 1/2 tons and buy heavy duty.

As for getting back to the Ridgeline, Honda should not enter the full size truck market because it is a market already well represented and most who buy full size are extremely brand loyal and would not consider a Honda regardless of quality. Honda should either get out of the truck market or make a truck with a more capable bed and better fuel economy. The Ridgeline is basically a Avalanche. All1, Beebe, and Lou BC brought up some good points about the bed on the Ridgeline. It is better to have an intelligent and constructive discussion about an article than one which attacks others resembling a school yard fight. We should act like grown men and not juveniles.

The Ridgeline was a decade long mistake.
The fundamentals were sound enough: unibody, independent suspension front & rear, front wheel drive power take off drivetrain [VTM4] to ease current Honda owners into 'trucks' and allow for the more open minded owners of trucks to try something else.
Honda failed on the details: engine/transmission, price, marketing (explain that you can have TWO spare wheels, so you aren't screwed if you have a load in the bed and can not access the 'trunk' mounted one)
Looks: changing from the correct amber rear turn signals to red ones is stupid one. Honda should have offered 18" wheels-as an option, from day one.
Headlight: Honda missed an opportunity to have the best headlights in the truck business.
and the worst, the transmission selector: P R N D5 (button for D3) 2 1.

BAFO will say stup!d crap to to stir things up, then claim he never said it. That's why he won't get a TypeKey account. It should be a requirement. It'll stop the trolls, besides the HEMI spamification on every article.

I do hope this does work, this is my first entry in this article.

@US Truck Guy,
You might be DiM judging by quality of your research or trolling for a better word. Why are you disrupting this site.

And to top it off you haven't the gonads to use you real name. What a loss you really are. What are you hoping to achieve? Really?

Here's the correct date and link your allegation started. As a matter of fact it was a discussion between two commenters called Gpz85 and RobertRyan. DiM cut into the conversation and I corrected DiM.

The date was February 20th 2013, a date prior to your link and comment. Your link is date April 2013.

http://news.pickuptrucks.com/2013/02/where-have-ford-ranger-buyers-gone/comments/page/3/#comments

THIS IS ROBERT RYAN'S INITIAL COMMENT.

@Gpz85 A very different market here to the US. A lot of "Midsize pickups" here are more like an F250 in carrying capacity. Bigger US Pickups on the other hand are too small to do the job. A case of a vehicle category falling between the cracks. Same sort of thing happens in Europe, where F150's/Silverado's are too big for their small roads(Not Freeways though) and again too small for larger jobs. Fuel efficiency is a very big issue in Europe as well.

Posted by: Robert Ryan | Feb 20, 2013 1:59:16 PM

HERE IS dIm'S RESPONSE;

@RobertRyan - The double cab Holden Colorado has about 2,500 lbs payload vs the super cab F-250 with about 3,500 lbs both 4X4s. Not too bad for a little truck, but the F-250 can load up to 3X more inside the bed and can tow about 3X more than the Holden.

Posted by: DenverMike | Feb 20, 2013 2:51:37 PM

HERE IS MY RESPONSE;

@DenverMike
Wrong again!

Here is a "cut and paste" on the Colorado. Some models can carry 1.4 tonnes or about 3 100lbs. And can tow about 7 800lbs.

Also a single cab with a 6'x8' tray is quite usable. That's 48 sq ft.

Our utes aren't much different from your trucks, in that configuration also determines load capacity.

"A new fully-integrated tow-bar kit supports Colorado’s class-leading 3.5 tonne towing capacity on the 2.8-litre range. Every Colorado is rated for a one-tonne payload, with some models able to carry up to 1.4 tonnes."

Posted by: Big Al from Oz | Feb 20, 2013 3:22:13 PM

So, as you can see you are very, very wrong in your assumption in all aspects of your argument.

It was not I who initiated this discussion, but DiM via interference with a discussion between Robert Ryan and Gpz85.

As much as you want to belittle and bully you must be correct.

Also, bullies don't normally hide behind their mother's apron strings. They have the gonads to show their face.

What's integrity and sincerity? Don't know?

Was that a real BAFO, or one trolling from his/her mom's basement?

Or is the real BAFO trolling from his/her mom's basement?

And should anyone waste their time responding to ANY of them???

I am planning on purchasing a new pickup truck in the 2015 model year and am considering either the new F150 Lariat or a Ram 1500 Laramie.

As for a Honda Ridgeline - no way its a joke...

This is a Pilot with a little, tiny pickup box on the back. The entire drivetrain is light-duty at best. The "truck" has no payload capacity, no towing capacity and gets crappy gas mileage to boot. This is nothing more than a light weight SUV with a little open box on the back.

Honda should stay with what it does reasonably well - stick to making fuel efficient, little econo-boxes that entry level buyers can drive forever and lack any kind of excitement or character.

Honda really lost its way in recent years. The Ridgeline was not enough truck for my farm use, and I keep wishing for one with an extended cab and bigger bed.

Someone will produce that sort of truck, since so many of us do not need a full-sized vehicle. I'll keep hoping, but the prognosis is grim, given the recent cheapening of the Civic and softening of the CR-V into a glorified wagon. Our old CR-V does useful work hauling tools on the farm.

Jeep, there's a clear opening for you here, with a real and tough light pickup.

The RL was nothing Id ever need or want but I love it b/c it never tried to be what it wasnt and that is why it has many devoted fans. Where I think it struck out and didnt attract people who where not already big Honda fans was that it was ugly as sin, and had an outdated driveline. If youre going to make something with alot less towing capacity and hauling ability (which is what alot of people want not everyone needs 400hp and to tow a house.) then it should logically have superior gas mileage. Now Im a Dodge guy who tows and uses the bed alot and loves my 400+hp see this is how you talk civilly about other vehicles/brands.

Honda has the luxury of launching the Ridgeline after the competition. That gives them opportunity to fine-tune things to come out on top (of direct mid-size competitors).
We can be fairly sure about a few things. It will have:
A transverse V6 coupled to at least a 6 speed auto- cribbed straight from the MDX.
A similar 4wd system to the 1st gen. Perhaps some more aggressive locker settings.
Class-leading ride and interior space-
Strut front suspension, just like every other Honda.
The big question mark to me is the rear axle/suspension. The current IRS contributes to good ride and handleing, but is expensive and suffers from geometry changes, if you load the truck heavy. Suppose you could make some sort of ride leveling standard on all but the cheapest model.
If the next Ridgeline goes and drinks like the MDX, delivers best in segment interior space and ride, and show up with a more useful bed, it could be a hit. The big wonder will be where the customers will come from. Pilot converts? From 1/2tons?

My husband owns a Honda Ridgeline (2009). We are currently trying to get Honda to honor their warranty by replacing the hood that is rusting through from the inside out. We have been trying to get Honda to do the right thing by replacing the hood, as suggested by two different body shops. One was an independent and the other a competitor of the dealership we purchased the truck from. Our dealership says there is nothing they can do because the Factory Rep insists it is surface rust...She has never personally seen the truck, just looked at pictures... Very frustrating!!

Its very baffling reading all the negative comments about the old Ridgline. Coming from a Toyota Tacoma extended cab, the Ridgline was a huge improvement in every respect without adding much to size or fuel consumption. And just about everyone I know under age 30 thinks it would be the coolest thing on wheels except for one thing, you can't lift it any appreciable amount. But what's with that bizzare complaint about not geting to the trunk when the bed is loaded? Would people prefer no below bed trunk so they don't have to complain about not being able to get to it? Its ridiculous, that under bed trunk is probably the best advancement in pickups since the crew cab came along. Its wierd, almost like the big 3 must hire people to cruise these forums and bad mouth the unibody upstart that might be eating their lunch once 90% of their customers figure out what all they could do with an underbed trunk, and that they don't need more payload than you can haul with a Ridgeline. Truth be told, the only thing that's kept the Ridgline from taking off among young people, is the inability to lift it. No matter how cool the ride, nobody wants to be seen with those tiny tires on a truck, its just plane embarassing. Anyway, hopefully Honda won't listen to all the old fart trolls who would love to just see it killed off, and they'll come up with something just as cool looking, but capable of a 6" lift. If so, you heard it here first, they'll lock up every new pickup buyer under age 30 guaranteed.

I love my Ridgeline.
The mistakes were made in the
marketing department!