Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Pickups Honda Ridgeline 2009 Honda Ridgeline
90 messages, Last post on Sep 13, 2009 at 10:41 AM
You are in the Honda Ridgeline Forum. Your Host is kcram
|
|
|---|---|
|
Replying to: trailmster (Jul 26, 2007 6:56 am) |
|
|
|
|
I think the Ridgeline would do well if they could extend the bed - either by getting rid of the back seat and going with an extended cab with suicide doors or just making it longer by 6 inches. I'd also like to see a slot in the bed that allows items longer than the bed to fit in with the gate closed e.g. skis As for the siding ala Aztec - I'd have to agree that the looks of the Ridgeline could improve. The lines on the new Tundra are awesome. imo |
|
|
Replying to: roaddog2 (Jul 20, 2007 8:15 am) NOT. Way too much torque for a F/awd PU. Unless you throw in SH-AWD along with.... By the way just when does the Ridgeline get the absolute BEST F/AWD system available in the marketplace? |
|
|
Replying to: callmerayz (Oct 16, 2007 10:55 am) Me too...! But mine goes well beyond mere preference. Does the Ridgeline have a standard open rear diff'l, with the L/R electromagnetic clutches in line with the two rear axles?? In which case the Ridgeline could be quite readily converted to rear, 2WD/RWD. All one would need do is remove one front halfshaft and supply a constant 12 volts to each of the rear axle drive clutches. There is an aftermarket device advertised in RV magazines (remco.com??) that can be used to manually engage/disengage the front halfshaft. So you could easily and quickly convert back to the VTM AWD system from the RWD mode. |
|
|
Replying to: callmerayz (Oct 16, 2007 10:55 am) At first glance the Ridgeline seems to have all the "hardware" required to implement the SH-AWD system. But. The two rear electromagnetic clutches, unlike those used with SH-AWD, do not have position feedback sensors. But I see no reason why those could not be inexpensively added and then we would have SH-AWD capability on the Ridgeline. Obviously adding a bit of rear "overdrive" would be a walk in the park. |
|
|
Replying to: bcbud (Oct 17, 2007 1:34 pm) Variable speed, speed varies from the engine RPM via a conventional CVT (mid-fifties Studebaker SC), or an electronically controlled Toyota HSD type CVT. With a positive displacement variable speed SC the throttle intake airflow metering plate/restriction is no longer needed.
|
|
|
Not off-road but... Back when we owned Jeeps, an '85 and then a '92, we often resorted to the use of the Jeep's Part-time 4 wheel drive mode when the roadbed conditions became severe enough. But I don't know if we EVER used the low range 4X4 mode. If need be the Ridgeline could be easily and quite simply converted, modified, to have a reasonably robust part-time 4WD mode. Just supply a constant 12 volts to both rear axle drive clutches. Like any part time 4WD system you would NEVER want it be engaged on a non-slippery roadbed surface due to the possible damage arising from driveline binding or "wind-up". Now if it were just as simple to "uncouple the front drivelines. |
|
|
Replying to: wwest (Apr 09, 2008 7:55 am) If Honda needs to beef up the Fridgeline drivetrain for their diesel, they can do so. If they need to detune the torque at low speeds, they can do that too. You can argue about whether or not a diesel will make economic sense, given the cost premium of the diesel engine and the cost premium of diesel fuel in the US versus the mileage premium of the diesel. Personally, I think the numbers don't work at the moment. But there's no question that Honda can engineer the truck to handle to torque of a turbo diesel if they want to.
|
|
|
Replying to: nedzel (Apr 16, 2008 8:53 am) Looks as if maybe you missed my point. The Ridgeline is NOT small nor is it light, it is HEAVY and LARGE, can carry a HEAVY load and/or tow one. Were a turbo-diesel to be used it would have to be sized large enoug to provide the same level of engine responsiveness, passing performance, or at least close, on the highway as the current engine. So, absent SEVERELY derating the turbo-diesel acceleration performance, much, more of, the engine torque would need to be deverted to the rear (a good thing, a DAMN good thing IMMHO). My point was that the rear driveline would therefore, of necessaty, have to be "beefed up" On that last point we seem to agree.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: wwest (Apr 18, 2008 9:09 am) this truck could look nicer imo |
|
You are here:
Forums
Pickups Honda Ridgeline 2009 Honda Ridgeline
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
2010 Honda Ridgeline
2011 Toyota Tacoma
2010 Nissan Frontier
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
