2017 Honda Ridgeline Bed Is More Innovative, Sort of

Honda Ridgeline 3 MW II

To its credit, Honda retained its category-exclusive under-bed storage trunk in the all-new 2017 Ridgeline. Not only does it provide a place to hide things you don't want exposed, you also can use it as a giant cooler during tailgate parties.

This clever idea was borrowed from the Odyssey minivan, which has the same storage bin in the rear cargo area. (The Odyssey uses the space to store the fold-and-flip third-row seats.) Since the minivan and the midsize pickup have a similar chassis design, Honda engineers took advantage of the space to create something unique for pickup buyers.

Additionally, according to Automotive News, Honda engineers altered the plastic mixture from which the bed is made to make scratches less visible. Rather than white scratches, the new bed reportedly shows black scratches. That chemical compound change along with a new in-bed speaker system (which uses embedded "exciters" rather than easily damaged speakers) will likely give the new pickup just enough distinction to keep it a strong choice for some midsize pickup buyers. But will it be enough to be profitable for Honda?

The short answer is yes. While the Ridgeline basically has been ignored for the last five years, the segment has attracted a great deal of attention due to the arrival and success of new Chevrolet, GMC and Toyota midsize pickups. With the midsize segment getting plenty of scrutiny, there's likely to be a good amount of curiosity about the Ridgeline if not full-blown cross-shopping.

Even if Honda sells only a few thousand more Ridgelines per year than its recent average of 13,000 trucks, an increase to 25,000 overall units would almost double the sales for the sport-utility pickup. More likely, as more Honda loyalists and "anti-truck" buyers check out this new Ridgeline — which drives like a car, is easy to enter and exit, and delivers a smooth ride — Honda could rack up more sales as a second vehicle for families.

The new Ridgeline is likely to be profitable for Honda because much of its production and design is based on other popular Honda vehicles — the Pilot and Acura MDX SUVs, and the Odyssey. Even if the Ridgeline never comes close to its peak sale numbers of 50,000 units per year (2006), its profit margins here must be spectacular. Maybe that's why Honda doesn't care about the "it's not a pickup" criticism the truck generates among pickup enthusiasts. This is as close to an easy business decision as it gets. And we still get another choice in the midsize pickup segment that can tow and carry a reasonable amount of weight.

Cars.com photo by Evan Sears

 

Ridgeline 2 II

Ridgeline 4 II

Honda Ridgeline 2 MW II

Ridgeline 3 II

 

Comments

http://blog.hemmings.com/index.php/2013/07/01/lost-cars-of-the-1980s-volkswagen-pickup/

they say a picture is worth a 1000 words.

Looks good!!!

I've been driving full size trucks for sometime now and seeing the Honda's new "wanna be" truck it looks like it will fits my needs.

And then there is the option, despite not being the Honda way, of going to a place like Terminex and offering a pared down version as a fleet vehicle.

Instead of the Rangers and Tacomas of the past, the Ridgeline could show a group of "guys guys" it has all the conveniences needed for daily duty.

Also, not to imply any ridiculous misogyny, but the bulk of the old Ford Sport Trax drivers I notice are women. I feel like the Ridgeline has the opportunity to fill that void with its traditional look and Honda's recent commitment to interior comforts.

"Hope you don't get a flat with the bed loaded...lol"

See, it's funny cause it's...well...um, I don't know.

I live in Texas where 1 in 6 pickups are sold. I can tell you with absolute certainty 95 percent of the time are they not loaded, AND 70% of them never see a load worthy of such a HIGH-larry-US scenario.

I wish it weren't true, but it is...in the age of the blue ovaled cowboy Cadillacs.

What happened to the good old days when you just slapped a set of longhorns on the hood of your Deville? /sigh

If it would just come in an extended cab with a 6 foot bed....

Why is everyone so concerned about a flat tire? It's not like anyone is going to load it with gravel. If you get a flat just move what ever "small" load is on the bed & change it. Who ever is looking into the Honda obviously doesn't need a full size truck capability. The truck under the bed was clever. I don't think Hondas goal here is to be in construction sites. lol

"Hey Honda what do you do if the BED IS LOADED AND YOU GET A FLAT?"

Ummmm. unload it?

@rolling can of beer, what not used to a little bit of manual labor? Why don't ya just keep complaining like most modern human beings while I just sit back and watch the rest of you whiners grow weaker and weaker.

I have storage under my rear seat in my pickup. What happens if I want something when there are passengers?

I really don't consider the spare location a real issue. How often do we get flats? My last flat (not off road) was over 20 years ago.

I would be more concerned about those dumbass scissor jacks. Why can't auto manufacturers offer safer jacks?

So, what would you do if the bed is loaded and you get a flat?

In such a case, take the tire, jack and other parts out before you load the bed and store them in a convenient place and use the trunk and tire space for smaller, less needed cargo.

Even if the Ridgeline did somehow pull in 25k in overall sales, that would still be only half of what it sold in 2006. Not so good. You need to aim higher or it will be a failure again.

Liam,
Not bad, a common sense answer for the numptie's above comments.

Also, the guys whining about the location of the spare should also look at how often the storage tub vs the spare will require access.

I would think the storage tub will have thousands of times more use before you encounter a flat tyre.

But, it appears if it isn't a Frod, GM product or Ram it will be criticised. Like BC Mike (Lou) is so concerned about load and tow figures, when most pickups are empty with one passenger and half a tank of gas. And when they are used they tow on average 5 000lbs.

What is Frods current mantra?? Load and tow! What else will BC Mike be selling?

The manufacturers are building to what the consumer will use the vehicles for.

I wonder if the rear storage tub is secure, ie, locks?

Mike L,
Manufacturing in the auto industry isn't just about total numbers as you perceive them to be.

Some models are actually sharing one production line. If Honda has a line that will produce X amount of vehicles which will keep half the line working for 5-6 months of the year, why not produce a similar product to utilise the available production capacity?

GM has done this with the Colorado/Canyon. Due to the success of the vehicle GM will now move the van production to allow for greater midsize pickup production.

Not a bad business move on Honda's part. It's called hedging your bets. It reduce risk for Honda.

Plus you guys have another pickup to choose from, thus expanding consumer choice. You could still do with more choice.

Mike L,
Manufacturing in the auto industry isn't just about total numbers as you perceive them to be.

Some models are actually sharing one production line. If Honda has a line that will produce X amount of vehicles which will keep half the line working for 5-6 months of the year, why not produce a similar product to utilise the available production capacity?

GM has done this with the Colorado/Canyon. Due to the success of the vehicle GM will now move the van production to allow for greater midsize pickup production.

Not a bad business move on Honda's part. It's called hedging your bets. It reduce risk for Honda.

Plus you guys have another pickup to choose from, thus expanding consumer choice. You could still do with more choice.

Mike L,
Manufacturing in the auto industry isn't just about total numbers as you perceive them to be.

Some models are actually sharing one production line. If Honda has a line that will produce X amount of vehicles which will keep half the line working for 5-6 months of the year, why not produce a similar product to utilise the available production capacity?

GM has done this with the Colorado/Canyon. Due to the success of the vehicle GM will now move the van production to allow for greater midsize pickup production.

Not a bad business move on Honda's part. It's called hedging your bets. It reduce risk for Honda.

Plus you guys have another pickup to choose from, thus expanding consumer choice. You could still do with more choice.

I hope this Honda is a success.

That tub is good. The Honda isn't an off road vehicle, so the tub will not impinge on anything.

It's at the rear of the pickup, so access is very good.

The Ridgeline appears to sit lower than the current crop of midsizers as well, improving ergonomics.

Not bad Honda, keep it up.

Big Al many times I will check this site out when I am sitting on the toilet making a statue of Johnny Welfare.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OBK42qvsP8c

I agree with Mike L. Clearly Honda won't be selling very many of these in this economy. And after the first year sales will tank just like the old one.

It will remain a niche truck for soccer dads, period. Normal truck people wont even look at this truck. In the end, time will slip by and leave Honda with nothing but boring stories from BARFO. Alright, papa jim, keep it rocking now!

Ultimately this will sell too close in price to full size, full capability pickups.
I like it, it meets my needs, but their base level awd will be too expensive.

I have not ever liked a Honda I drove. The three I tried had really bad road noise. But I will look at this thing. I understand Honda has worked on NVH.

The bed actually looks usable, unlike the prior generation. And the fact ugly white scratches are a thing of the past is a plus. (My Tundra has scratches and dents but it is a TRUCK. This is a car.)

I do like the dual action tailgate. And the in-bed storage is cool Stuff is really hidden from prying eyes. Honda may have a home run here.

It's a front wheel drive minivan that has been converted to a sorta truck. Only yuppies will buy,

"Hey Honda what do you do if the BED IS LOADED AND YOU GET A FLAT?"
Ummmm. unload it?
Posted by: elkhunter | Jan 24,
/QUOTE

That will be quite funny to watch if you haul some mulch or sand or gravel!

And whats with that tiny space saver spare?another genius idea..

Papa Jim had this to say about Honda's poor execution:

Honda's timing could not be worse--for three reasons.

1. They are entering the NA market with a new product at a time when the economy is crap, and about to get worse. Higher interest rates do not bode well for products that are financed by about 95 percent of new buyers.

2. Their competitors at GM beat them to the mid size market by at least a year, meaning that the pent up demand for the small pickup segment in NA is already somewhat spent.

3. One of the key reasons that mid size trucks were so appealing in years past was the rising price of gasoline. Every indication today is the price of gas headed down for at least a while.

I predict this may be a very good truck that will not break sales records. A year from now we can look back on this and know.
Posted by: papa jim | Jan 11, 2016 6:28:28 PM

I have to agree and it appears Honda is building for a tiny niche, dorky soccer dads. Not that there is anything wrong with that. But the timing and execution could not be more wrong.

Wouldn't buy this truck but I do like it. I don't think the spare is going to be a problem. People aren't going to be loading this bed full of sand or gravel. Its not made for that kind of work. Very rarely will a truck like this be loaded with anything you can't unload by hand. Its like complaining about unloading your trunk if your car gets a flat. This has unique features for a unique group of people. If I only had two kids it would be the perfect vehicle for my wife to drive.

Chances are whoever buy these things prolly wouldnt begin to know how to change a tire. Most likely they will call road side assistance and have somebody else do it. Like other cars this should just have one of those mobility kits that people won't know how to use either.

I am trying to figure out why all the talk on if you get a flat tire? For one the chances of a flat are minimal.

2 they are even less likely when combined with a load in the bed that would be hard to remove.

3 is it is even more rare to have a complete blow out with a difficult load to remove.

It seems most people forget that with TPMS you know if your tire reaches a preset low threshold. Chances are your going to know before something g really bad happens. I do like the truck, but styling seems a little bland. But it will sell and work for those that need something like this. I do t see it replacing a full frame mini truck for larger loads but it will pull Fat Albert From Oz on his horse float during gay pride week in San fransisco.

http://qz.com/594984/the-secret-history-of-gms-chinese-bailout/

roadram many times I will check this site out when I am sitting on the toilet making a statue of Johnny Welfare.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8wByB48_YSc

Been watching the gm guys. What an embarrassment they are to genral motors. Johnny Blow is the same guy doing all this. Same crap from him all the time. He's gmsnotsogreat, he's that rolling can of beer, he's Michigan bob, he's Sierra and So many others. As far as fixin a flat tire, you gotta dig something out to get to your dounut no matter what you drive. How many people will be hauling gravel or anything like it in this little truck anyways?? Just typical gm fangirls. Now chebby has several new commercials comparing chebby to FORD about Wi-Fi. Gimmie a break. Even ram is comparing themselves to FORD. I guess when you make the best truck around, the rest have to try and compare themselves to you but theres reason for that now ain't they.

Well, here is what I need to put good money into in a new midsize truck in this modern era:

1) Solid Rear axle, for curb-sliding survivability in winter:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qnzBkfQCOZw

2) 6-speed Manual Transmission;

3) 6 Foot Box;

4) Haul 1500 lbs and Tow 7,000 lbs;

5) Rear Wheel Drive (RWD);

6) Enclosed Ladder Frame;

7) Minimum 300 lb-ft.of torque;

8) Minimum 30 MPG fuel mileage.

The Ridgeline has or will have none of that.
So, this "thing", for want of a better term, is not even on my radar horizon. I don't give hoot about how sexy it looks.

==================

The independent suspension on the rear really just ticks me off. Its alright to have it on the front end (Since you never tow anything with the front end of the truck) but to have a independent suspension in the rear?! You won't be able to tow anything and when you want to go offroad the rear will always get snagged on pebbles.

Silveringot,
Why is can't an IRS tow heavy weights?

Hmm..........

Why does it tick you off?? There are other manufacturers to choose a vehicle that will fulfill your towing dreams.

NMGOM,
You normally submit quite logical comments.

Why can't an independent vehicle tow?

Also, what demographic is this vehicle targeting? People that want to tow big loads?

Just because it doesn't suit your requirements doesn't make the vehicle inferior as you are attempting to allude to.

@Silveringot

So, let me get this right.

You don't like the idea of independent rear suspension designs on a pickup due to it not performing well off road?

Like the Hummer H1, certified offroad beast??? Think about it.

papajim,
Also, take the twin turbo V8 Porsche Cayenne.

It can go from 0-60mph in 4 seconds! Has IRS and can tow nearly 8 000lbs!

Not bad and this is from a performance vehicle.

Live axles are strong, but they are used because they are the cheapest option for the manufacturers.

Pickups are not performance vehicles.

I'd be this Ridgeline will take out most any pickup on the racetrack, due to it's all round independent suspension.

Anyway, 75% of pickups only carry the driver half a tank of gas and a load of air in the bed.

Buy a vehicle to suit your desire, requirement, needs and/or wants if you can afford it.

@BAFO, but does it matter if this pickup can take out any truck on the track when your only worried about FE? Contradict much?

Hey don't include me in that foolishness


Posted by: roadram | Jan 24, 2016 10:03:27 PM

That loser includes everyone in it. I just ignore it.

I wonder if this Ridgeline is more economical than a 2.7 aluminium F-150 EcoThirst.

This probably would suite 75% of what potential pickup buyers would ever want from a pickup.

And it will handle well, AWD for icy and slippery conditions. I would like to take one for a test drive.

It offer CUV refinement and handling with independent suspension all round, which would also equate to better and safer braking.

Good work Honda. I suspect this will sell better than the previous Ridgeline.

Are you just pure stupid BARFO? I mean seriously. You say you are not anti Ford but you clearly are. I really don't care if you like Ford or not but don't say you like them and clearly bash Ford all the time. And with pure stupid comments like you just made. Of course a Ridgeline should be more economical than and F150. At least it better be. It should be more economical than a GM 1500 with any engine and a fiat 1500. You are comparing a small SUV with a bed to a full framed 1500 series truck. How stupid can you be?

I'll likely buy a Ridgeline.

I'll leave the 5/4 scale truck to the guys with 5/4 scale heads and 3/4 brains.

The Ridgeline is a truck for the boss and the other trucks are for people with dirt under their nails. ;)

@LMAO, its very funny that BAFO tries so hard to speak like he has some sort of intelligence, problem is, he then goes and compares apples to watermelons as he did above, he has done this countless times and proven he really has no clue, I'm surprised he hasn't posted as his many other names as in the past when he gets called out

LAMO,
You are correct.

I don't foresee the Ridgeline obtaining 15.6mpg combined like the aluminium F-150 powered with a 2.7 EcoThirst.

Do you??

The Ridgeline, on the other hand, is rated by the EPA at 17 mpg combined (15 mpg city, 21 mpg highway). And at that rating, the Ridgeline sits at the bottom of the list.

http://www.thecarconnection.com/review/1086106_2014-honda-ridgeline_green_7

Yep, LAMO, 17mpg is better than 15.6mpg.

BARFO, why don't you compare it to the 5.3 ecotec from GM. Seems the last comparo here had it doing worse in the MPG department compared to the Ford 2.7 and 3.5L. You are a complete tool. An accurate comparison to the Ridgeline is a Tacoma and GM twin. But even that is not apples to apples because the Ridgeline is not as a robust truck as those. More of a horse float puller for you during gay pride week.

Big Al From Oz - - -

Didn't mean to offend: Just listing my truck needs.
But you are right: the target market for this Ridgeline is obviously not real truck buyers. It's just too fragile.

BTW: The vehicle can't tow a load comparable in weight to an SLA because the Rzeppa joints in the half-shafts aren't as strong as Cardan joints on the SLA's...

====================


http://qz.com/594984/the-secret-history-of-gms-chinese-bailout/

Posted by: johnny doe | Jan 24, 2016 9:37:28 PM


Looks like the Ford kids are using my name again, right in the middle of LMAO kid and truckcrazy kid posts. Can't you losers use your own names?

Don't worry welfare doe, I use my own user name, of course you seem to be playing around with mine a lot lately. But I could care less. You need to change your signature though to "sent by my Obama phone".

I use my own name everytime I post on here, unlike some who have several names and even talk to themselves. They are eat up with the DumbA$$.

The Ridgeline, on the other hand, is rated by the EPA at 17 mpg combined (15 mpg city, 21 mpg highway). And at that rating, the Ridgeline sits at the bottom of the list.

http://www.thecarconnection.com/review/1086106_2014-honda-ridgeline_green_7

Yep, LAMO, 17mpg is better than 15.6mpg.

Posted by: Big Al from Oz | Jan 25, 2016 7:02:10 AM

And this is a 2014 not even the 17's.



The comments to this entry are closed.