Honda Pilot - Any owners out there?- Mtbr.com
Results 1 to 40 of 40
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Rev Bubba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,861

    Honda Pilot - Any owners out there?

    Does anyone have anything bad to say about this vehicle? (except mileage)

  2. #2
    The Duuude, man...
    Reputation: ncj01's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,537
    Quote Originally Posted by Rev Bubba
    Does anyone have anything bad to say about this vehicle? (except mileage)
    I was about to ask the same question about the Honda Ridgeline. I assume it's based on the same platform as the Pilot, just a truckbed in the rear....
    FS: Everything

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    192
    No, but I have been test driving vehicles of this stature this week. I am planning on selling my 93 Toyota pickup and getting something roomier for girlfriend, dogs, and company.

    See below if you are interested in my take on the matter as of today.

    So far I have test driven:
    Honda CRV- too small
    Honda Pilot- best interior, ride characteristics, and room- exterior is bland. With all the seats folded down you could fit a 4x6 sheet of plywood, much more room than any of the other models in this size range.
    Toyota Highlander- interior felt small and the bottom of the seat was short kinda uncomfortable
    Toyota 4Runner- felt the Pilot was much more comfortable and roomier (front and back seats) and wasn't impressed with the power of the V6 (comparing apples to apples here), but I am sure the V8 is much better.
    Nissan Pathfinder- after sitting in it, I didn't even test drive it. Felt cramped.
    Nissan Murano- really liked the interior room, probably the quickest one so far, and the back seat is extremely roomy. The back seats fold down completely so the back is totally flat, unlike alot of the others. This is based on the Altima chassis so it rides more like a car and is more a crossover than a SUV. Like a station wagon on steroids.
    Nissan Xterra- ride was ok, little rougher than Murano, stadium seating, sit high up and upright. Interior room was great. It is a very basic SUV with no options of leather or anything like that.

    So, I have my choices narrowed down to (in order of cost):
    Honda Pilot
    Nissan Murano
    Nissan Xterra

    I am in no rush so I am going to test drive them all again, but I would like to test drive an '05 Xterra because it is redesigned interior and exterior, but none of the dealers have them yet.

    Jason

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    504

    Love It...

    I am NOT a car guy! I have been driving a 96 2-door cherokee since...96. I mean, bare bones, no power locks, roll down windows, etc. I often get comments about a $500 car with a Moots Smoothie on top of it. My generic response is "I have my prioritties straight." Bought my wife a Pilot in August. DVD for the kids, leather interior, I think they call it the EX-RES package. I love this car. When the lease is up in two years, I'm going to buy it for myself and get the Mrs something new! At the riskof sounding really cliche, it drives like a car. Very comfortable, and well appointed. Though that for the $$ it was the best deal around in 'full-size' SUV's. I have been very impressed with the service we have received from Honda. They made the lease very attractive, and wree great to work with. I gather the latter point is more dealer specific feedback, but I have been very impressed. We looked at the new Cherokee (not even in the same catagory), the Highlander and 4-Runner, Liked the Odyssey, btu no 4-wheel drive. Would buy another one without hesitation.
    MTBDad
    MCM #47.867

    "Freedom has a scent like the top of a newborn baby's head" - Bono

  5. #5
    The Duuude, man...
    Reputation: ncj01's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,537
    Quote Originally Posted by diiulio
    I am planning on selling my 93 Toyota pickup.

    Toyota 4Runner- felt the Pilot was much more comfortable and roomier (front and back seats) and wasn't impressed with the power of the V6 (comparing apples to apples here), but I am sure the V8 is much better.
    I'm sure you'll bring top dollar for the '93 toyota. Where are you located?

    For the 4Runner, which year model did you drive? The 2005's have the new 4.0 liter V6's which make 240 HP. That's the same as my 2004 Tundra V8 makes. The 2005 V8's have been upped to 275 or so HP.

    Thread related: my wife is wanting a new 4Runner, presumably becuase it's the soccor mom's SUV of the day...I wonder if the Pilot wouldn't be a better choice, give or take the re-sale value...??
    FS: Everything

  6. #6
    International Lover
    Reputation: Chip's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    102

    I don't care for how it looks. Chrysler Pacifica uber alles !! (nm)

    Quote Originally Posted by Rev Bubba
    Does anyone have anything bad to say about this vehicle? (except mileage)
    *****
    Win if you can, lose if you must, but always cheat.

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation: phil.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    256
    Check out a few months past (maybe december or november - pre 2005 for sure) issue of Consumer Reports magazine. They had a little review of Pilot, 4runner, and maybe one other SUV. Overall the pilot was the best value. I can't remember if it was after 3 yrs or 5yrs, but basically even though the 4runner was more expensive, the Pilot would end up being worth more (again according to Consumer Reports). If you are trying to find that issue, I also remember them testing tires for SUV's, and some digital cams.

    Quote Originally Posted by ncj01
    I'm sure you'll bring top dollar for the '93 toyota. Where are you located?

    For the 4Runner, which year model did you drive? The 2005's have the new 4.0 liter V6's which make 240 HP. That's the same as my 2004 Tundra V8 makes. The 2005 V8's have been upped to 275 or so HP.

    Thread related: my wife is wanting a new 4Runner, presumably becuase it's the soccor mom's SUV of the day...I wonder if the Pilot wouldn't be a better choice, give or take the re-sale value...??

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    15
    I have owned the Pilot for about a year. With the seats down the interior has lots of room. I think that the 2005 Pilot is a little better than the 2004 because of the sunroof and 6 disc changer.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rev Bubba
    Does anyone have anything bad to say about this vehicle? (except mileage)

  9. #9
    Recovering Weight Weenie
    Reputation: Padre's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    8,814
    FYI
    We just bought a used Honda Element last week.
    2003 AWD EX
    My wife has never loved a car and she loves this one already due to it's simplicity, ease if operation, and versatility.
    Bikes, dogs, groceries, parking, all of it is a breeze in that car.
    It might look like a toaster but it's pure functional beauty.
    SOOOO easy to make the inside ready for almost anything.
    We had a hitch installed and are using a sportworks...what a godsend.

    Oh yes...our first tank yielded us 24mpg with 1/2 city 1/2 highway.

  10. #10
    Caboose!
    Reputation: Fat Jeff's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    78

    Element Questions

    24 mpg with the 4wd? Nice milage. I have a 98 Blazer that's getting long in the tooth and I'll be replacing it in the next 18 months...the Element has been my target replacement so far...good mileage, good cargo space, and fully loaded brand new for $23k (2wd).

    Questions Padre...
    Do bikes fit inside with the back seat folded? Remove the front wheel to fit, or just go with a rack?

    Any idea how it drives with a "full load" on th back? I use my truck to move merchandise from my home "warehouse" to my shop on a near daily basis.

    How's the excelleration? I do a lot of highway driving in my commute and sometimes I need to mooooove!

    Thanks in advance!
    Aloooooooooooooha!
    Fat Jeff
    Honolulu, Hawaii

    Got a PBS mind in an MTV world-Jimmy Buffett

  11. #11
    Medium?
    Reputation: Fast Eddy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    6,723

    Apples and Oranges

    I think the pilot is the only vehicle mentioned in this thread that can seat anything like 8. The new pathfinder has a third row seat, but it probably still only seats 7.

    In particular the Element, while a great car, has only four seats/belts, and is only available with a four cylinder. I think it's a great car, and it's going to rip the pilot in terms of mileage, it's just not a proper comparison.

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Rev Bubba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,861

    Size Matters

    The Element and other smaller SUV's or station wagons do not fit my intended use. I have never owned anything larger than a four cylinder car in close to 40 years but currently have a need for something fairly large.

    The smallest vehicle I am considering is a Passat Wagon but my experience with my current Passat leaves me looking for something more dependable.

    I am just trying to find out if the Pilot has any hidden defects that you only find out about after a few years of ownership.

    Right now I totally trust Honda but I have never actually owned one of their vehicles.

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation: KRob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    12,036
    I got a chance to drive almost all the vehicles on my (not so) short list compiled from my post a couple of weeks ago: Here including the Pilot.

    Here are my conclusions and new (shorter) short list.
    The new short list:
    Honda Pilot: What everyone said. Pretty nice to drive, Roomy and well thought out inside and not too pricey.... Nothing wrong with this car at all.... except boring.
    Chrysler Pacifica: I was all prepard to hate this car and only drove it so I could confirm my biases and cross it off my list, but it's really quite nice. Handles well, rides quiet, pretty useful use of interior space. Peppier than expected. I'm more taken with the looks than I was before. Surprisingly high custumor satisfaction ratings as well. Hmmm.
    Ford Freestyle: It's sitting on a dealer's floor one block away from my office. Nothing wrong with it at all... my only gripe was with the relatively weak engine offered (203hp) but after comparing 0-60 times with cars in it's class (Pacifica, Pilot, etc.) it was just as fast or faster than most. It's 700 lbs lighter than the Pacifica. Three hundred lbs lighter than the Pilot.
    Saab 9-7x: Still not out. Dealer said not to expect it before June. Still interested though.... It's probably going to be in the 40-50K range with the V8.


    Here's the ones I scratched off:
    Cadillac SRX: Very nice. Handled well, quiet, best performer of those I drove,etc but not $10,000 better. Still not totally sold on the looks but I liked it better in person than in pictures. Snooty dealer/salesman turned me off.
    Volvo XC90: V8's are 50,000+ more difficult to come by and selling at MSRP +... No discounts. The T6 was nice but I didn't care for the turbo lag, and performance was not really any better than the front runners and it still cost 40-45K. I'm starting to agree with you Rev... Sporty + luxury + SUV = Oxymoron. If I'm going to spend that much on a car... I'm getting something else.... BMW330i, Infinit M45, A6, etc.
    Pathfinder:: Nice, but like someone else mentioned, it felt cramped. The vestigial third row seats are there only to say they have them. Very small. Even the second row seats were tight. Nicest dealer/salesman I talked to (Douglas Nissan in LV).
    Accura MDX: felt like a Pilot but had 10,000 dollars worth of fake wood and do dads hanging on it. I like the looks better, but I liked the interior less than the Pilot.

    Happy shopping Rev.

    I may just hold onto the Windstar until either the 3.5 V6 comes available on the Freestar or the 9-7x comes out..... Or go with the Pacifica if I can get a screaming deal on one with the options I want.
    Last edited by KRob; 02-17-2005 at 11:16 AM.
    I will cause thee to ride upon the high places of the earth...
    Isaiah 58:14

    www.stuckinthespokes.com

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    57
    I have an 03 Nissan Murano and absolutely love it. It is more of a true cross over since it was built on the Altima platform and has the CVT trans. You dont feel it shift gears because it doesnt. This gives it decent gas mileage (20 mpg for my suburban driving) and decent horsepower (280). With the back seats folded down it has plenty of cargo room. Plus the back seat area is big enough to drive around real size people. I like it. Later.

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    14
    Quote Originally Posted by Rev Bubba
    The Element and other smaller SUV's or station wagons do not fit my intended use. I have never owned anything larger than a four cylinder car in close to 40 years but currently have a need for something fairly large.

    The smallest vehicle I am considering is a Passat Wagon but my experience with my current Passat leaves me looking for something more dependable.

    I am just trying to find out if the Pilot has any hidden defects that you only find out about after a few years of ownership.

    Right now I totally trust Honda but I have never actually owned one of their vehicles.
    Hi , i'm a honda mechanic and i have to tell you that we don't have any hidden problem with it . just fallow the maintenance recomandation .
    The Ridgeline is not based on the same platform than the Pilot , the only thing they have in common is the engine and the people who tryed it last week loved it , the driving is even better than the Pilot . my choice would be (1)Ridgeline , (2)Pilot and element
    Just try a Honda and you would be convinced .

  16. #16
    Recovering Weight Weenie
    Reputation: Padre's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    8,814
    Quote Originally Posted by Fat Jeff
    Questions Padre...
    Do bikes fit inside with the back seat folded? Remove the front wheel to fit, or just go with a rack?
    Any idea how it drives with a "full load" on th back? I use my truck to move merchandise from my home "warehouse" to my shop on a near daily basis.
    How's the excelleration? I do a lot of highway driving in my commute and sometimes I need to mooooove!
    Thanks in advance!
    With the back seats folded up against the walls you could fit 2 bikes in with front wheels on, I suppose, w/ wheels off, no problem at all.
    We carry a dog all the time too, so the hitch rack was a no brainer.
    We've only done 2 bikes off the back so far, but with that set up, it's not even noticable. Not so with our Xterra which felt like I was dragging a big tail around...making the rear end sloppy a bit.
    The Element would be amazing for almost any normal load. With the seat so easy to flip out of the way (or remove...) you are left with a GIANT open square space...My wife drove a friends 8 year old around last wknd....that kid could walk around standing up in there...try that in a Pilot.
    Excelleration is plenty. It's no V8 but it's just fine for all our needs. I drive a Nissan Titan so I know what HP feels like and performs like, but still, the Element is plenty....at a humble 155HP.

  17. #17
    Glad to Be Alive
    Reputation: SHIVER ME TIMBERS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    42,930
    2002 4Runner...I love it. Handles great in the turns, 4X4 that get 20 miles to the gallon sometimes as high as 22mpg. 3.4 Motor is stronger than you think. Just need to push ECT button if you want more exceleration
    the trick is ENJOYING YOUR LIFE EACH DAY, don't waste them away wishing for better days

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,191

    I have a Highlander

    my buddy has a Pilot. He has 3 kids. We once put 3 kids, a nanny & her sister, him & I in it plus our 2 bikes to go to a race. The mileage is not that great. I drive the Highlander, V6, 3rd row. I have just 1 kid. The car is great. Decent mileage, really fast, quiet, smooth, fabulous in bad Colorado Weather, plus lots of airbags.

  19. #19
    Back of the pack fat guy
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,983

    I'll play too

    Quote Originally Posted by Fat Jeff
    Do bikes fit inside with the back seat folded? Remove the front wheel to fit, or just go with a rack?

    Any idea how it drives with a "full load" on th back? I use my truck to move merchandise from my home "warehouse" to my shop on a near daily basis.

    How's the excelleration? I do a lot of highway driving in my commute and sometimes I need to mooooove!

    Thanks in advance!
    FJ - I just bought a used 2003 Element EX 4WD with the 5 speed manual about a month ago. I had an Outback - bland, slow and unreliable. Have to say I've been VERY impressed with the Element so far. With one seat folded, I can fit one bike in with the wheel on, or two bikes with the wheels off. I also threw my Thule roof rack on top, but even at 6'1", it's a reach to put a bike up there. My brother and I took the E cross-state to Grand Targhee, Wyoming, to go snowboarding last week and loaded it up with boards and gear. It rode pretty well with a load in the back. Averaging about 80 - 85 mph into a headwind on the interstate, with the roof racks on, I got 19 mpg on the way there. On the way home, with a tailwind, I got about 22 mpg. Around town, I'm averaging about 23 mpg. If you need to move a load, this is your vehicle - fold the back seats up or take them out entirely and voila - you've got a small panel van. Acceleration is FAR, FAR better than the Outback, but that's a function of DOHC v. SOHC, fuel injected v. naturally aspirated, and 5 spd manual v. automatic. It's not close to what you'd call "fast," but it gets the job done. Watch the torque steer under hard acceleration, though. Handling and ride are where the E suffer - it handles like it looks - a refrigerator on wheels. The ride is pretty rough too - you'd think a car-based SUV would ride smoother. All in all, I give it about 8 stars out of 10.
    Attached Images Attached Images

  20. #20
    Recovering Weight Weenie
    Reputation: Padre's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    8,814
    Quote Originally Posted by Earthpig
    All in all, I give it about 8 stars out of 10.
    Hey there Earthpig..I could swear I've caught your E on a certain Element msg board website....

    edit: that MPG is awesome considering you had racks/snowboards up there....

  21. #21
    Back of the pack fat guy
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,983

    are you stalking me?

    Quote Originally Posted by Padre
    Hey there Earthpig..I could swear I've caught your E on a certain Element msg board website....
    Ever since I had our IT guys at my job block mtbr so I could get some work done, I had to find an alternate message board to waste time on during the day!!

  22. #22
    It's a Turner!
    Reputation: sirbikesalot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    524
    We have a friend that can afford to drive anything. He's owned S-class Mercedes and Porches. He drives a Murano and says it's the best car he's ever owned. The guy's like 6' 4" too. I test drove it and liked it a lot. Drives and accelerates like a car but has AWD and lots of room in the back.

    Other cars I liked were the Honda Pilot - lots of room but bland interior - and the MDX - nicer interior but a little smaller than the MDX.

    I drive an Xterra which I've had since 2000. I drove it across the country fully loaded with a cargo box on the top, bike rack with bikes in the back, completely packed in the back, with my wife and 3yr old. This car is a mule - not the smoothest ride, not the biggest, not very fast or powerful either, but gets the job done. Also, the waterproof seat covers and rubber floor mats rule, and the off-road capability is great - I've had it ploughing through 3ft of snow. Probably in another year I'll sell it and get something with more power and better fuel economy - which are my biggest complaints about it. Probably a Murano, which you can get a good deals on.

    Also, if I lived in CO I would get something with a V8 in it. Going through the mountains with a 170hp V6 sucked.

    Quote Originally Posted by aham23
    I have an 03 Nissan Murano and absolutely love it. It is more of a true cross over since it was built on the Altima platform and has the CVT trans. You dont feel it shift gears because it doesnt. This gives it decent gas mileage (20 mpg for my suburban driving) and decent horsepower (280). With the back seats folded down it has plenty of cargo room. Plus the back seat area is big enough to drive around real size people. I like it. Later.
    I didn't just drink the koolaid, I stuck my head in the punchbowl.

  23. #23
    Recovering Weight Weenie
    Reputation: Padre's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    8,814
    Quote Originally Posted by sirbikesalot
    I drive an Xterra which I've had since 2000..
    We dumped our Xterra because 14-15mpg around town just wasn't worth it.
    outside of that, the car was flawless for 32k miles till we sold it.
    like you said, that motor is waaay underpowered and the MPG suffered.

  24. #24
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Rev Bubba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,861

    Couple problems with the Murano

    First, it is shorter than the Pilot and that is a problem for part of my intended use.

    Two, style. While this is definitely subjective, the Murano reminds me of a morbidly obese person with flabs of fat hanging from their arms. It is a fat looking car and I just do not like it.

    Style being the one area I read of that people do not like about the Pilot, it is a design I definitely do like. The boxy shape is purposeful and appealing to me.

    Three, cost. The Murano seems overpriced compared to the Pilot.

    Basically, I was looking for problems anyone had with the Pilot and so far, no one has anything to say that is not glowing other than not liking the looks which is personal.

    It is not so much that I did not think the Pilot is a very good vehicle, I was just afraid I was missing something. Seems I was not although I do wish it had a better warranty. Three years/36,000 miles is not very impressive. I think 4/50K is more in line. Realistically, I think 10/100k is not unreasonable for a well built vehicle.

  25. #25
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Ski-U-Mah's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    509
    Quote Originally Posted by Padre
    that motor is waaay underpowered.
    Nissan has addressed this problem. The 2005 Xterra's are now powered by a 265 hp V6. They're also a bit wider and longer.

  26. #26
    Village Dirtbag
    Reputation: @dam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    2,283
    Quote Originally Posted by Earthpig
    ...but that's a function of DOHC v. SOHC, fuel injected v. naturally aspirated, and 5 spd manual v. automatic.

    Woah- hold on there. While the Subaru is SOHC, it still has 4-valves per cylinder just like the DOHC Honda, so that doesn't make much of a difference. Also, fuel injected is not the opposite of naturally aspirated. Your old Outback and new Honda are both fuel injected and both naturally aspirated. The opposite of fuel injected is carburated, and carburated cars haven't been available here in over a decade. The opposite of naturally aspirated is forced induction (turbo or supercharger) which is now available on the Subaru but not the Honda.

    Likely, the difference you feel in acceleration is due to the transmission (Auto subaru's are slugs) and gearing since they have about the same amount of power, and the Subaru is slightly lighter.

  27. #27
    try driving your car less
    Reputation: jh_on_the_cape's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,097
    Quote Originally Posted by Rev Bubba
    It is not so much that I did not think the Pilot is a very good vehicle, I was just afraid I was missing something. Seems I was not although I do wish it had a better warranty. Three years/36,000 miles is not very impressive. I think 4/50K is more in line. Realistically, I think 10/100k is not unreasonable for a well built vehicle.
    Have you considered a Eurovan? I actually did consider it, but the only problem is that they are no longer available new and the used ones now are expensive... but if you have the cash for the purchase and maintenance, it's a nice vehicle.

    For the warranty, Suzuki (gasp!) has a 10/100k warranty. You might want to check out the XL7 to see if it fits the bill for you (might not be large enough?). We rented one once and it seemed fine. definitely sat 7, which is why we rented it (family member funeral). I have not driven or ridden in a pilot. And i agree the murano is ugly.
    We got a passat wagon this year and it's great. Apparently they have addressed many of the problems, just in time for the next version of the car! Basically after 2003 many things were taken care of... so they say (vwvortex). When we got our passat, the suzuki forenza wagon had not yet come out. I really wanted to check that out.
    That said, if I had some money and was going to pop for a new car, I would get a dodge sprinter. Tons of room, decent fuel economy with the diesel.

    i don't drive that much. and i really loathe driving as i always feel so stressed out and anxious afterwards. but the passat is much nicer and easier on the mind to drive.
    i am not into cars really, but the pilot is really a 'blah' car.
    Since I am not into cars, i suggested to my wife, 'why not a ford taurus?'. and she replied 'For the same reason that you do not wear sweatpants everyday.'
    Honda Pilot=sweatpants. Everyday. Beige Sweatpants.
    I don't need gucci. But at least a pair of jeans.
    Only boring people get bored.

  28. #28
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Rev Bubba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,861

    Eurovan is too big and not quite right.

    I have had many, many years of experience with VW's going back to my first Rabbit in '77. Also, I do not buy used. Resale is not be an issue since I hold onto my new vehicles for a long time.

    I really am looking for the beige pair of sweatpants this time around. Again, the Pilot fits my needs more than anything else and I was just seeking information on any hidden problems. So far, no one has reported any.

    For excitement, my wife will still be driving some type of sporty car. Who knows what in the end but certainly nothing boring. Nope, the vehicle I need in the near future is one based on utility and reliability short of being a full-on truck. The crossover vehicles appear to be the current name for full-size station wagons and the full-size wagon is what I am looking for.

    Reputation for reliability kind of leaves out the Dodge. I just do not trust them. As far as MPG, I have always driven 4 cylinder cars, taken mass-transit, turned out the lights, kept the temps turned down and now its my turn to burn a little gas.

  29. #29
    jrm
    jrm is online now
    mtbr member
    Reputation: jrm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    11,195

    Try an air box mod and a cat back

    Quote Originally Posted by SHIVER ME TIMBERS
    2002 4Runner...I love it. Handles great in the turns, 4X4 that get 20 miles to the gallon sometimes as high as 22mpg. 3.4 Motor is stronger than you think. Just need to push ECT button if you want more exceleration
    I have 98 sr5. I did a cool air air box mod and a poor mans cat back that once i reset the EGR i gained maybe 1`0hp in the mid range and some torque on the bottom and midrange. It pulls noticably harder then OE especially with the ECT button on power and the OD switch off.

    Heres a helpful web site that outlines the mods ive done. www.yotatech.com use the search function and use "air box mod" and "dynaflow" as your items. The total mods cost me around $100. Its worth it..

  30. #30
    contains quinine
    Reputation: Debaser's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    4,639
    Quote Originally Posted by sirbikesalot
    Also, if I lived in CO I would get something with a V8 in it. Going through the mountains with a 170hp V6 sucked.
    I think you left something out here: Going through the mountains in a heavy SUV with a 170hp v6 sucks.

    First, going through the mountains in my wife's Subaru Legacy (non turbo, 5 speed, 4 cyl 165 hp, 166 ft/lb torque) is a non issue, even loaded with 4 people, roof top cargo box, and a weekends worth of clothes and gear. We were passing plenty of folks all weekend going up mountain passes.
    Take the long cut, we'll get there eventually.

  31. #31
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Rev Bubba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,861

    Thanks. Pilot is still my first choice.

    For a number of reason, most of all security, the Ridgeline would not fit my needs. I have to be able to secure things inside the vehicle.

  32. #32
    www.derbyrims.com
    Reputation: derby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    6,764
    Quote Originally Posted by @dam
    Woah- hold on there. While the Subaru is SOHC, it still has 4-valves per cylinder just like the DOHC Honda, so that doesn't make much of a difference. Also, fuel injected is not the opposite of naturally aspirated. Your old Outback and new Honda are both fuel injected and both naturally aspirated. The opposite of fuel injected is carburated, and carburated cars haven't been available here in over a decade. The opposite of naturally aspirated is forced induction (turbo or supercharger) which is now available on the Subaru but not the Honda.

    Likely, the difference you feel in acceleration is due to the transmission (Auto subaru's are slugs) and gearing since they have about the same amount of power, and the Subaru is slightly lighter.
    Honda VTEC in a CRV or Element has more torque with similar horsepower as the Outback. I've driven both automatics and the Honda has better acceleration. Maybe gearing is part of it. I have a Slow-buru 2000 Legacy (same power as Outback) and it is noticably slower accerating onto the freeway, but not too bad. I got it over a honda due to lower cost used and more interiour space than a CRV (about as much as the Pilot) and I think the Legacy is much better looking.

    - ray

  33. #33
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Rev Bubba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,861

    Legacy has less space than Pilot

    2005 Legacy: 188.7 long, 68.1 wide, 58.1 high for a total of 66.2 cubic feet of storage.

    2005 Pilot: 188.0 long, 77.3 wide, 71.7 high for a total of 90.3 cubic feet of storage.

    2005 Passat: 184.3 long, 68.7 wide, 59.0 high for a total of 56.5 cubic feet of storage.

    These figures are all for wagons.

  34. #34
    Recovering Weight Weenie
    Reputation: Padre's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    8,814
    Quote Originally Posted by jh_on_the_cape
    Since I am not into cars, i suggested to my wife, 'why not a ford taurus?'. and she replied 'For the same reason that you do not wear sweatpants everyday.'
    Honda Pilot=sweatpants. Everyday. Beige Sweatpants.
    I don't need gucci. But at least a pair of jeans.
    Hilarious. Just awesome.

  35. #35
    Brakes?
    Reputation: pimp-daddy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    152

    SUVs SUCK!



    A minivan or station wagon is the ultimate transporter for bikes.

  36. #36
    Recovering Weight Weenie
    Reputation: Padre's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    8,814
    Quote Originally Posted by pimp-daddy
    A minivan or station wagon is the ultimate transporter for bikes.
    Nice try pimp, but a station wagon in and of itself does not mean it's environmentally friendly. I would be more careful saying "ultimate" too often and with that certainty.
    It might be ultimate for your needs but certainly not mine.
    Hmm..now that I think about it...have I ever seen a pimp driving a station wagon with a bike in the back? nope...don't think so...

  37. #37
    rack admirer
    Reputation: Mr Magoo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    664

    go to edmunds.com

    get into the town hall forum and select the honda or suv topics like buying experiences and maintenance. these guys are detailed. I was hot on a Pilot at this time last year. Priced EX-cloth at about $25K Boston area. Alas mounting tuition payments landed me in a 96 Camry wagon that really rocks. Can do 7 passenger, hides bikes inside, no repairs, stable in the snow, dependable, also stealthy. It suits all of your above needs except it is used. Keeping cash in your pocked never goes out of style.
    MCM # 57

  38. #38
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Rev Bubba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,861

    Actually, most of that is false.....

    However, most people who take a stand like that do not take the trouble to do any real research and base their views on what other people say. If you want to point out all that is wrong with an SUV you need to site first person sources otherwise an intellegent person will not take you seriously.......

    So, any original sources for your statement? Other than, everyone knows its true?

    It seems if all the extreme statements about the environment/vehicles/US/western Europe made over the past 35 years were true, we would have long ago been dead from killer bees, drowned by rising seas, died of cancer from power-lines or DDT (instead we banned DDT and how many millions have now died from malaria? - oops, people overlook that one). You get the picture.

    Geez, instead our lifespan is longer than ever.

  39. #39
    Brakes?
    Reputation: pimp-daddy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    152

    Caution;  Merge;  Workers Ahead! Just the facts...ma'am

    Rev:
    "So, any original sources for your statement? Other than, everyone knows its true?"

    SUV's give us more? Yes!

    Air Pollution - Larger engine, lower MPG, means more pound-mass of fuel burned per mile --Physics

    Dependence on Foreign Oil - We get the majority of our oil from overseas sources. You need data to know that? Oh wait, let's perforate Alaska!!! (duh)

    Rollovers - Physics again...higher Center of Gravity + big tires = tendency to roll (again...duh)

    Traffic Deaths - NHTSA studies show this, as with the above point.

    Here's some proof for you: SUV's Kill!

    Gas Expense - Puuleeeeeze. If your SUV gets 12 mPg and my car gets 30 mpg, whooze paying more to drive to the trailhead.

    Higher medical premiums - Associated with the above link showing death rates. Insurance companies do risk analysis, and don't think this data is not part of that.

    Higher car insurance premiums - See above.

    Bottom Line - You're free to choose what type of vehicle you drive. But so long as you consider the environmental/social/economic impacts, or don't...that's your choice.

    What a country! Come to the Summit , we'll drink a beer together and debate, or we'll talk about bikes...maybe better.

    Tha-Pimp

  40. #40
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Rev Bubba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,861

    I looked up some of your souces

    SUV's give us more? Yes!

    Air Pollution - Larger engine, lower MPG, means more pound-mass of fuel burned per mile --Physics

    (or maybe the larger engine is cleaner burning. You have to compare apples to apples. What is the actual emissions of the engines you are comparing? I have always owned 4 cylinder cars but my 1972 4 cylinder gave off much more in emissions than 2005 engines and got worse gas mileage - I was lucky to get 23 mpg highway and this was in a very advanced for its time European import)

    Dependence on Foreign Oil - We get the majority of our oil from overseas sources. You need data to know that? Oh wait, let's perforate Alaska!!! (duh)

    (So? In a market economy, when it becomes cost effective to get fuels elsewhere, we will do it. I make 12 times what I did when I got out of college and paid .35/gallon. Gas would have to rise to 4.20/gallon for the same ratio. The source of raw material means little. What does it cost?)

    Rollovers - Physics again...higher Center of Gravity + big tires = tendency to roll (again...duh)

    (Current SUV's are more stable than your average car was 10 years ago. I have been referring to vehicles built on a car platform as opposed to a higher center of gravity truck)

    Traffic Deaths - NHTSA studies show this, as with the above point.


    Here's some proof for you: SUV's Kill!

    Here are some of your sources.

    FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Thursday, April 9, 1998 Contact: Tim Hurd Tel. No.: (202) 366-9550 NHTSA 18-98 SECRETARY SLATER PROPOSES NEW LABEL WARNING OF ROLLOVER DANGER FOR SPORT UTILITY VEHICLES U.S. Transportation Secretary Rodney E. Slater today proposed a new design for the mandatory utility vehicle rollover warning label, using graphics and brighter colors to replace the current 20-year-old text-only design. " Safety is President Clinton’s highest transportation priorit... [excerpted by twURL] -

    SEVEN YEAR OLD DATA ON EVEN OLDER VEHICLES

    Of the 5,259 fatalities caused when light trucks struck cars in 1996, 81 percent of the fatally injured were occupants of the car.(9) In multiple-vehicle crashes, the occupants of the car are four times more likely to be killed than the occupants of the SUV.(10) In a side-impact collision with an SUV, car occupants are 27 times more likely to die.(11)

    1996!

    This is published NHTS data for the current model, not one seven years out of date.

    2005 SUV Honda Pilot

    Front - Driver and Passenger 5 star safety rating
    Side - Front and Rear 5 star rating
    Rollover - 4 star

    2005 VW Passat

    Front - Driver and Passenger 5 star
    Side - Front and Rear 4 star
    Rollover - 4 star

    2005 BMW 3 Series

    Front - Driver 4 star, Passenger 4 star
    Side - Front 3 star (safety concern), Rear 5 star
    Rollover - 4 star

    According to current NHTS the Pilot, overall, is safer than either the VW or BMW, two cars that people tend to feel are safe. The Volvo V70 received 5 stars fro the first two categories but was not rated for rollover.

    Gas Expense - Puuleeeeeze. If your SUV gets 12 mPg and my car gets 30 mpg, whooze paying more to drive to the trailhead.

    (See above. In any case I am currently getting 35 mpg. What Crossover SUV is getting 12 mph? Certainly not the Pilot and it is one of the poorer performers. Again, when we run out of oil, and I am not convinced that this is really going to happen anytime soon, we will find it economical to switch to other fuels.

    Higher medical premiums - Associated with the above link showing death rates. Insurance companies do risk analysis, and don't think this data is not part of that.
    (See current NHTS Data)

    Higher car insurance premiums - See above.
    (See current NHTS Data)

    Bottom Line - You're free to choose what type of vehicle you drive. But so long as you consider the environmental/social/economic impacts, or don't...that's your choice.

    What a country! Come to the Summit , we'll drink a beer together and debate, or we'll talk about bikes...maybe better.

    Tha-Pimp

    The new bottom line is if you compare current vehicles and specific models, the Pilot is as safe or safer than most which would result in lower insurance and medical costs. Man's effect on the environment is greatly overstated when you read the actual sources of most statements. It is easy to pick and choose parts of a study to back a preconceived opinion (Hell, just listen to a Johovah Witness than actually look up passages quoted in the Bible) but the truth is often quite different.

    By the way, do you have Yuengling Beer in Colorado?

Similar Threads

  1. Paging 5' 9(ish) med RX owners
    By BarkBuster in forum Titus
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 02-01-2005, 09:51 PM
  2. Contest - but never a winner
    By old_dude in forum The ReCycle Bin
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 01-17-2005, 06:01 PM
  3. Updates to Spider / 5.5 owner's manual
    By E-man in forum Intense
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 07-20-2004, 01:08 PM
  4. Shop owners roll call
    By jakey in forum General Discussion
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 05-27-2004, 08:07 PM

Members who have read this thread: 0

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

THE SITE

ABOUT MTBR

VISIT US AT

© Copyright 2019 VerticalScope Inc. All rights reserved.