Honda Ridgeline was named the 2006 truck of the year by Motor Trend magazine

[canadianexpress]

http://autonet.ca/News/story.cfm?story=/News/2005/12/20/1361288-ap.html

[Shnak]

But... but... but... how can that be when it's not even a truck? 

[sterling]

I wonder it will be Edmunds toty?

http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Drives/LongTerm/articleId=105797/pageId=65485

[wing]

And Canadian Truck of the Year, and American Truck of the Year..... oh oh.

[Snowman]

The strut issues mentioned concerns me. I will investigate further to see if this is a one of. Honda rarely makes mistakes especially engineering ones. Anybody who buys a Ridgeline to go off reading needs to think again. The Ridgeline is not a real truck, I have owned real trucks and this is not one. We are not leasing the Ridgeline to be a truck.

This is like a person calling a Highlander a SUV and taking it off road and complains about it.

[smainville]

I would say "truckette" of the year

[barrie1]

I can't see it lasting very long in a truck capacity at all if its falling apart with so little stress on it. This will cost them many sales as the word will travel about this problem real quick. It just proves how many Magazines have no clue as to what they are voting on. 

[The Mighty Duck]

This video is interesting...  http://www.motortrend.com/av/112_0601_toty_winner_video/

I agree when he says that the Ridgeline creates a new class of truck...  if Honda develops a V8 for this vehicle and fixes up some of the other minor issues, it could well be a real threat to the domestics.

That said, I don't think much of the competition this year either: Lincoln Truck?  Meh.  Mitsu Raider?  Barely hear a thing about it.  Dodge, same old stuff, really.  Just bigger.

[Snowman]

I can't see it lasting very long in a truck capacity at all if its falling apart with so little stress on it. This will cost them many sales as the word will travel about this problem real quick. It just proves how many Magazines have no clue as to what they are voting on. 

Barrie, the struts failed for some reason not the structural integrity of the vehicle.

[initial_D]

Probably a RUST problem. 

Demo, the Ridge is not body-on-frame type of vehicle, it can never be a REAL WORK truck, regardless what is under the hood.

[smainville]

I can't see it lasting very long in a truck capacity at all if its falling apart with so little stress on it. This will cost them many sales as the word will travel about this problem real quick. It just proves how many Magazines have no clue as to what they are voting on. 

Barrie, the struts failed for some reason not the structural integrity of the vehicle.

That thing won't even last 11 months

[The Mighty Duck]

Demo, the Ridge is not body-on-frame type of vehicle, it can never be a REAL WORK truck, regardless what is under the hood.

Two comments:

First, I understand the concept of a body-on-frame design, but I don't understand it's importance in terms of what a truck ("truck" ) can or can not do...

Second: I don't think the Ridgeline is, strictly speaking, being built as a "real work truck"...  it's being built as a usable truck for the family that needs a truck on weekends, but a decent family hauler the rest of the time.  The simple fact that, as you say, it CANNOT physically serve as a work truck implies this, but so too does the lack of available V8 - it's not being branded as a "work truck".  In my experiance many companies use domestic trucks for work trucks based on cost anyway, so Honda is (smartly) playing into the other truck market, the so-called "casual truck" market.

In that sense, it does what it is designed to do...  it is an "urban" pickup truck, not a heavy duty work horse.  Whether Honda does decide to go after that market remains to be seen, but the Ridgeline is not the truck to do it (and isn't intended as such).

My thoughts.

[smainville]

Demo, the Ridge is not body-on-frame type of vehicle, it can never be a REAL WORK truck, regardless what is under the hood.

Two comments:

First, I understand the concept of a body-on-frame design, but I don't understand it's importance in terms of what a truck ("truck" ) can or can not do...

Second: I don't think the Ridgeline is, strictly speaking, being built as a "real work truck"...  it's being built as a usable truck for the family that needs a truck on weekends, but a decent family hauler the rest of the time.  The simple fact that, as you say, it CANNOT physically serve as a work truck implies this, but so too does the lack of available V8 - it's not being branded as a "work truck".  In my experiance many companies use domestic trucks for work trucks based on cost anyway, so Honda is (smartly) playing into the other truck market, the so-called "casual truck" market.

In that sense, it does what it is designed to do...  it is an "urban" pickup truck, not a heavy duty work horse.  Whether Honda does decide to go after that market remains to be seen, but the Ridgeline is not the truck to do it (and isn't intended as such).

My thoughts.

I agree, and for that matter the Ford Sportrac was not much of a truck either.

[Snowman]

That is the primary purpose of the Ridgeline for us, an urban utility vehicle (UUV ). A comfortable 5 person cab with a functional box for trips to the cottage, Home Depot, landfill site, and moving odd sized objects around. The towing capacity will be sufficient for hauling quads, snowmobiles, campers, and utility trailers if and when needed. Honda reliability and quality also plays into the equation.

[ktm525]

I think Snowy has it right. If I was ready to dump my Dakota the Ridgeline would definately be on the short list. I am looking for a weekend dirtbike hauler and weekday city truck. An old friend of mine sells Hondas and last night I paid him a visit and sat in a Ridgeline. The "truck" is about what I am looking for, I really like the interior and just enough space front/rear. I don't care for the front end treatment at all, the updated Pilot looks much nicer and I am sure the Ridgline will see it soon. The other dislike was the huuuge C pillar blind spot and associated elevated bed rail. The strut issue is a little worrying as I tend to hammer down lots of washed out logging roads. Hell I pound my 2003 Passat down washboard logging roads with no issues. Perhaps just a bad batch of struts?

[Snowman]

From what I have read on the internet in the last few days this appears to be an isolated incident. Perhaps the driver was not truthful in the way the Ridgeline was driven. I am monitoring the internet buzz closely.

[Spiderman]

I have a friend with a 2001 Civic SI that has had to replace all 4 struts on his car 3 times within 85,000kms.  This was not the first I heard of this happening on late model civics.  Maybe it's a Honda thing?  They should switch their strut supplier or something.

[mdxtasy]

I had one strut replaced on the EL under warranty...it was sweating a bit.  No such issues on the MDX so far.

[ktm525]

Perhaps struts are a bad idea on a vehicle as hefty as the Ridgeline. I would prefer springs/shoocks. That way when the stock shocks inevitably wear out I can replace with a nice Rancho or Bilstein for reasonable money and perform the swap in my garage.

[initial_D]

Body-on-frame, more steel, and more strength I guess. A lot less “flex appeal” than unibody design. Grew up in rural areas, seen farmers used their trucks to haul gravel, sand, dirt, storage bins, tow heavy equipment, ets … Even your basic building contractors haul a lot of lumber, tools, other heavy building material, trailers. The guys in the oil field need heavy duty trucks to haul their work gears, welding equipment, generators, hauling living trailers to job sites. Even the Titans and Tundras are big enough for their usage, lot of ¾ tons with turbo diesels engines around. Even the new breed of truck owners here in Alberta need room to haul a couple of Quads and Ski-doo on the beds with electric lifts.