Again, the standard 3.7L motor is still at 5500 without changing the final drive which starts biting into the economy and longevity is where the comparisons starts. You can keep touting the optional towing and but that is not where Honda is competing. I have always had trucks with frames to tow everything from my pontoon boat to flat beds with excavators so I have never recomended Ridgelines for HD towing, but neither would I any 6 cylinder from Ford whether or not it is a turbo charged 3.5 L. It will prove a disaster for the heavier loads. That’s not where the Honda is at and neither is that where the standard 6 cylinder Fords. I have shopped for trucks with my boss for HD towing…it’s v8 and diesels.
Ecoboost used to tow high loads will result in very unreliable motors. We had this discussion before about using turbos to give you extra power and economy by over working a smaller motor and non specialized motor. So, using a capable Honda 6 used in a minivan is a much better choice then using a 4 from a Pinto which Ford did for years with the Ranger and calling it a truck motor or throwing on a turbo and pretending it’s some kind of advancement which it isn’t. It’s a cheap way to an end.
So sure, you can coax more hauling with options, but given the abilities approaching the base, the Ford can’t handle as well, ride as comfortable, have safer on road handing while still going off road as well and still have capacities that approach those of basic full size trucks. It’s all of this in these areas along with a Honda Motor vs an unproven turbo charged motor from Ford.
You don’t buy a Ridgeline to tow 7500 lbs, but you do buy one to tow a bit less and have a much safer over the road vehicle which trucks in general are not. No one cares to acknowledge that a Ridgeline is actually better then Ford trucks off road, which framed vehicles are often touted for, because of it’s suspension articulation, good approach and departure angles, fully locking rear differential and does all of this in the way that Honda wants to compete with how many Fords are actually being used, not in their perceived potential.
I would be interested to take an informal poll of those of us who actually think an F150 would be a better truck yet how few us who thought that way actually own one (truck) or even use them as they were intended. In reality, the vast majority of we here would be better Served by the performance parameters of a Ridgeline. I feel there are few here who actually needed and use a more stout vehicle for daily use yet we can still argue in their favor as a more practical and safer vehicle for many home truck owners. Many of us have this macho truck mentality yet few of us really use them as intended. It’s the f250 and comparable HD versions of GM that are more practical haulers that should be used for safe hauling in the 6500 to 10000 lb range…with some of these in the past, not now, using the same motors as found in the f150.
When I have towed in that range (5 k to 7.5k ) for a contractor, I would not give a thought to a half ton and drove those rated for much more. We are disallusioned to think that even a Ford dealer won’t rightfully turn you over to a F250 if you regularly haul any thing over 7500 lbs.all half tons are comparably light duty haulers regardless of their ratings Honda gets this and there is little sense in them trying to compete with another light duty in the hauling numbers game. Contractors who regularly haul as little as 5k plus, do so with bigger trucks then half tons. Half tons like the f150 are reserved for the lawn maintenance people towing lawn mowers on utility trailers. It’s one thing to be rated for occasional hauling, it’s another to do it every day !
I have a couple of neighbors who own F150’s. About the only thing they use it for is hauling their garbage to the dump (we don’t have trash pickup). Huge waste if you ask me. They NEVER go off-roading…they don’t have a trailer to haul. I will admit that every other year they need to buy 2 sheets of plywood the F150 is the truck to have.
@MikeInNh I think your example is repeated in a lot of places. The high sales of the f150 illustrate how in love with an idea we are that can easily be replaced by a good 5 by 9 utility trailer with a ramp.
I think your example is repeated in a lot of places. The high sales of the f150 illustrate how in love with an idea we are that can easily be replaced by a good 5 by 9 utility trailer with a ramp.
Your neighbors sound a lot like me. I have an old 1997 F-150 (4WD long bed), that I put maybe 1000 miles on year. I use it mainly to haul stuff to the dump, tow my PWC, and get around when it snows. I could probably get by without it, but I picked it up for a song, it’s dirt cheap to insure and keep around and it’s very useful to have around when I do need it. Something with the capabilities of a Ridgeline would probably work for me, but if I were looking for new truck, I’d get another F-150 since you get more truck for your money, seems more logical to me. Better to have something and never need it, than to need something and not have it.
Also neither of my other vehicles is suitable for towing anything, so the utility trailer wouldn’t be viable for me.
I have an old 1997 F-150 (4WD long bed), that I put maybe 1000 miles on year. I use it mainly to haul stuff to the dump, tow my PWC, and get around when it snows.
Theirs are no more then 3-4 years old. They buy new every 4-5 years.
I see a lot of these trucks in drives that hubby uses to commute with. They are “truck” people who never use them as trucks. They are like Joe Buck in “Midnight Cowboy” with lots of truck glitz and little truck use. @ForDaddy on the other hand, is legitimately using an old unpretentious truck in the way it was intended. Besides, anything you can pick up dirt cheap qualifies as to be used in anyway. ;=)
It certainly ain’t useless in our state with mandatory auto insurance. You may need the card to avoid a summons if a cop asks for it. Sounds pretty useful to me.