[home][rumors and news][model release matrix][dealer network][desktop calendar][exhaust notes][tov forums][links][search][sponsors][garage][login]

Tire Rack Upgrade Garage
 Search for a Dealer:
 Canadian Flag US Flag
 Honda Acura
 ZIP  
BBC: Honda set to close Swindon factory in 2022
More.......................
Nikkei: Honda enters agreement with CATL for battery supply contract through 2027
More.......................
Acura Marks 30 Years Since Debut of Iconic NSX Supercar
More.......................
American Honda reports January sales
More.......................
Acura Marks 15th Anniversary of Super Handling All-Wheel Drive™
More.......................
Honda releases pricing and EPA information for 2019 Passport
More.......................
American Honda Reports December Sales
More.......................
American Honda Reports November Sales
More.......................
Professional Motorsports --> Re: F1 - 2019 Pre-Season Testing - Days 1-4
Join Discussion......
General Talk --> Re: Honda Loses a $38 Million Liability Lawsuit
Join Discussion......
Today's Reading Links --> Re: Swindon in peril
Join Discussion......
Today's Reading Links --> Re: Poor reliability scores for Honda and Acura
Join Discussion......
TOV Asia --> Re: Honda JP Sales 2018: Hybrids make up 55% of reg. cars
Join Discussion......
General Talk --> Re: Honda's new sub-brand Honda e
Join Discussion......
Amateur Racing & Driving --> Re: My first helmet !
Join Discussion......
General Talk --> Timid AHM marketing
Join Discussion......
Type R --> Re: Honda closing UK plant that builds the Type R
Join Discussion......
General Talk --> Re: Original NSX prototype only had a SOHC V6 without VTEC
Join Discussion......
General Talk --> Re: Rumours that Honda will close its Swindon plant
Join Discussion......
General Talk --> Re: Sunny came home with a mission
Join Discussion......
Professional Motorsports --> Re: 2019 F1 Releases/Launches
Join Discussion......
Type R --> Re: Type R bike carrier
Join Discussion......
Civic --> Re: When will Si have more HP and LEDs?
Join Discussion......
2019 Honda Passport PR Photo Gallery
Read Article....................
2019 Acura NSX PR Photo Gallery
Read Article....................
First Drive: 2019 Acura ILX
Read Article....................
2019 Acura ILX PR Photo Gallery
Read Article....................
First Drive: 2019 Honda Pilot
Read Article....................
2019 Honda Pilot PR Photo Gallery
Read Article....................

[fancy] [flat] [simple]
  TOV News > Honda releases pricing and EPA information for 2019 Passport > > Re: Doesn't really split the difference between CR-V and Pilot, but it's still really good

Viewing Threshold (What is this?)

Thread Page - [1]
Author
    
JeffX
Profile for JeffX
Doesn't really split the difference between CR-V and Pilot, but it's still really good [View News Item]    (Score: 1, Normal) 01-29-2019 11:02
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
Hoping to get my first drive impressions out there ASAP. Still polishing it up.
NSXman
Profile for NSXman
Re: Doesn't really split the difference between CR-V and Pilot, but it's still really good [View News Item]    (Score: 1, Normal) 01-29-2019 11:08
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
Perhaps value to value it might be better than the Pilot, but the entry MSRP is actually higher by a few hundred it appears to me. So yeah, a split the difference is a tough sell to me.
Cory
Profile for Cory
Re: Doesn't really split the difference between CR-V and Pilot, but it's still really good [View News Item]    (Score: 1, Normal) 01-29-2019 12:14
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
It's definitely more expensive than I was expecting.
JeffX
Profile for JeffX
Re: Doesn't really split the difference between CR-V and Pilot, but it's still really good [View News Item]    (Score: 1, Normal) 01-29-2019 12:32
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
NSXman wrote:
Perhaps value to value it might be better than the Pilot, but the entry MSRP is actually higher by a few hundred it appears to me. So yeah, a split the difference is a tough sell to me.


Yep. The Sport has quite a bit more content than the LX, so on a level field the Passport is just slightly cheaper than the Pilot.

Sib
Profile for Sib
Re: Doesn't really split the difference between CR-V and Pilot, but it's still really good [View News Item]    (Score: 1, Normal) 01-29-2019 12:58
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
I wonder where did the ground clearance disappear over the course of 2 month?
In November press release they said: "Ground clearance is up 0.5 inches on front-wheel drive models and 1.1 inches on all-wheel drive models compared to Passport's three-row sibling, Pilot,..."
https://hondanews.com/releases/2019-honda-passport-makes-world-debut-adventure-ready-all-new-5-passenger-suv-on-display-at-2018-los-angeles-auto-show?page=8

In the specs released today:
Ground Clearance (2WD/AWD, unladen): 7.5 in / 8.1 in

The 2019 Pilot has 7.3 in across the board.

So, in reality for AWD Passport the increase is 0.8 in., not 1.1 in. Not to mention the 0.2 in for the FWD Passport.

And for that Passport lost 2 MPG in highway gas mileage. (the gearing is identical to 9-sp. Pilots)

deanh
Profile for deanh
Re: Doesn't really split the difference between CR-V and Pilot, but it's still really good [View News Item]    (Score: 1, Normal) 01-29-2019 13:06
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
It feels like it really needs an EX trim or that they missed some key features on the Sport model. You cannot get a power driver's seat unless you get leather nor can you get CarPlay or BSI. It seems like a miss to me there.
Fitdad
Profile for Fitdad
Re: Doesn't really split the difference between CR-V and Pilot, but it's still really good [View News Item]    (Score: 1, Normal) 01-29-2019 13:06
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
JeffX wrote:
NSXman wrote:
Perhaps value to value it might be better than the Pilot, but the entry MSRP is actually higher by a few hundred it appears to me. So yeah, a split the difference is a tough sell to me.


Yep. The Sport has quite a bit more content than the LX, so on a level field the Passport is just slightly cheaper than the Pilot.



Did they talk about the truncated trim levels Jeff?

I assume it's "production related" - but really they want to make all the money and profit so they're just pushing higher trims. I'm betting very much that finding a Sport will be difficult. They for damn sure don't make many LX Pilots.

What I mean is - if there was an LX Passport they wouldn't make any anyways.

lamboman
Profile for lamboman
Re: Doesn't really split the difference between CR-V and Pilot, but it's still really good [View News Item]    (Score: 1, Normal) 01-29-2019 13:44
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
deanh wrote:
It feels like it really needs an EX trim or that they missed some key features on the Sport model. You cannot get a power driver's seat unless you get leather nor can you get CarPlay or BSI. It seems like a miss to me there.

Based on the chart from the debut post, it states that the sport model comes with the 8-way power driver seat.

longhorn
Profile for longhorn
Re: Doesn't really split the difference between CR-V and Pilot, but it's still really good [View News Item]    (Score: 1, Normal) 01-29-2019 14:06
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
Fitdad wrote:
JeffX wrote:
NSXman wrote:
Perhaps value to value it might be better than the Pilot, but the entry MSRP is actually higher by a few hundred it appears to me. So yeah, a split the difference is a tough sell to me.


Yep. The Sport has quite a bit more content than the LX, so on a level field the Passport is just slightly cheaper than the Pilot.



Did they talk about the truncated trim levels Jeff?

I assume it's "production related" - but really they want to make all the money and profit so they're just pushing higher trims. I'm betting very much that finding a Sport will be difficult. They for damn sure don't make many LX Pilots.

What I mean is - if there was an LX Passport they wouldn't make any anyways.



Honda has the luxury of a factory running maxed out. Honda can't handle much more production, so what they do produce are higher margin trims. I get it, but it stinks if one is looking for an affordable lease on a lower trim. Good time to be Honda.

TonyEX
Profile for TonyEX
Re: Doesn't really split the difference between CR-V and Pilot, but it's still really good [View News Item]    (Score: 1, Normal) 01-29-2019 14:22
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
JeffX wrote:
Hoping to get my first drive impressions out there ASAP. Still polishing it up.



I'm really curious. Because I was hoping the price would be a tad less than the larger Pilot.

Does the rear feel better planted on the road?

How does it compare with the Ridgeline? -Which feels very good.

BTW, I don't care about FWD. Only the AWD models.

deanh
Profile for deanh
Re: Doesn't really split the difference between CR-V and Pilot, but it's still really good [View News Item]    (Score: 1, Normal) 01-29-2019 15:15
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
lamboman wrote:
deanh wrote:
It feels like it really needs an EX trim or that they missed some key features on the Sport model. You cannot get a power driver's seat unless you get leather nor can you get CarPlay or BSI. It seems like a miss to me there.

Based on the chart from the debut post, it states that the sport model comes with the 8-way power driver seat.



The press kit from hondanews.com says the following for Sport:
6-way manual driver's seat

JeffX
Profile for JeffX
Re: Doesn't really split the difference between CR-V and Pilot, but it's still really good [View News Item]    (Score: 1, Normal) 01-29-2019 15:19
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
TonyEX wrote:
JeffX wrote:
Hoping to get my first drive impressions out there ASAP. Still polishing it up.



I'm really curious. Because I was hoping the price would be a tad less than the larger Pilot.

Does the rear feel better planted on the road?

How does it compare with the Ridgeline? -Which feels very good.

BTW, I don't care about FWD. Only the AWD models.



I like it enough that I'm seriously looking into getting one. It hits most of the marks for us, though I knew it was incredibly unlikely, I was wishing Honda had some secret architecture out there that could truly split the difference between the CR-V and Pilot, not only in price but in dimensions. This thing is 98% the size of a Pilot and about the same pricewise, but from a chassis perspective seems to be tuned much more to my liking. So the added roominess of the Pilot is a bonus for us, though I will miss the efficiency of the CR-V around town. We'll probably end up with the Touring AWD, which is more than I want to spend. But it has a few features beyond the EX-L that make it "worth it" for me to go there instead of the EX-L AWD.

I too have zero interest in the FWD version.

Mikeydred
Profile for Mikeydred
Re: Doesn't really split the difference between CR-V and Pilot, but it's still really good [View News Item]    (Score: 1, Normal) 01-29-2019 15:41
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
JeffX wrote:
TonyEX wrote:
JeffX wrote:
Hoping to get my first drive impressions out there ASAP. Still polishing it up.



I'm really curious. Because I was hoping the price would be a tad less than the larger Pilot.

Does the rear feel better planted on the road?

How does it compare with the Ridgeline? -Which feels very good.

BTW, I don't care about FWD. Only the AWD models.



I like it enough that I'm seriously looking into getting one. It hits most of the marks for us, though I knew it was incredibly unlikely, I was wishing Honda had some secret architecture out there that could truly split the difference between the CR-V and Pilot, not only in price but in dimensions. This thing is 98% the size of a Pilot and about the same pricewise, but from a chassis perspective seems to be tuned much more to my liking. So the added roominess of the Pilot is a bonus for us, though I will miss the efficiency of the CR-V around town. We'll probably end up with the Touring AWD, which is more than I want to spend. But it has a few features beyond the EX-L that make it "worth it" for me to go there instead of the EX-L AWD.

I too have zero interest in the FWD version.


Jeff the bigger question is will you be able to live with the ZF9?

For us as long as you leave the paddles alone its actually not a bad trans, of course we resolved the intercooler issue with the tow package which helped as well.

JeffX
Profile for JeffX
Re: Doesn't really split the difference between CR-V and Pilot, but it's still really good [View News Item]    (Score: 1, Normal) 01-29-2019 16:58
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
Mikeydred wrote:
JeffX wrote:
TonyEX wrote:
JeffX wrote:
Hoping to get my first drive impressions out there ASAP. Still polishing it up.



I'm really curious. Because I was hoping the price would be a tad less than the larger Pilot.

Does the rear feel better planted on the road?

How does it compare with the Ridgeline? -Which feels very good.

BTW, I don't care about FWD. Only the AWD models.



I like it enough that I'm seriously looking into getting one. It hits most of the marks for us, though I knew it was incredibly unlikely, I was wishing Honda had some secret architecture out there that could truly split the difference between the CR-V and Pilot, not only in price but in dimensions. This thing is 98% the size of a Pilot and about the same pricewise, but from a chassis perspective seems to be tuned much more to my liking. So the added roominess of the Pilot is a bonus for us, though I will miss the efficiency of the CR-V around town. We'll probably end up with the Touring AWD, which is more than I want to spend. But it has a few features beyond the EX-L that make it "worth it" for me to go there instead of the EX-L AWD.

I too have zero interest in the FWD version.


Jeff the bigger question is will you be able to live with the ZF9?

For us as long as you leave the paddles alone its actually not a bad trans, of course we resolved the intercooler issue with the tow package which helped as well.



I'm learning to deal with it. My biggest gripe is that the first 4 gears aren't quite close enough together, particularly 2nd and 3rd. At least that's what I think I was complaining about while out on the trails. I'd be in 3rd, want for a bit more torque, click it, and then it would race to almost redline in 2nd.

But for everyday living it's plenty smooth and somewhat "normal" feeling and it didn't seem to have so much of that downshifting over-rev-matching of some of the other applications where after it freewheels for a bit too long, the car actually ACCELERATES momentarily instead of providing the desired engine braking effect.

The 10AT would've been ideal for sure. Or give me a properly geared 8AT and I'd be happy.

TonyEX
Profile for TonyEX
Re: Doesn't really split the difference between CR-V and Pilot, but it's still really good [View News Item]    (Score: 1, Normal) 01-29-2019 17:28
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
JeffX wrote:
Mikeydred wrote:
JeffX wrote:
TonyEX wrote:
JeffX wrote:
Hoping to get my first drive impressions out there ASAP. Still polishing it up.


I'm really curious. Because I was hoping the price would be a tad less than the larger Pilot.

Does the rear feel better planted on the road?

How does it compare with the Ridgeline? -Which feels very good.

BTW, I don't care about FWD. Only the AWD models.



I like it enough that I'm seriously looking into getting one. It hits most of the marks for us, though I knew it was incredibly unlikely, I was wishing Honda had some secret architecture out there that could truly split the difference between the CR-V and Pilot, not only in price but in dimensions. This thing is 98% the size of a Pilot and about the same pricewise, but from a chassis perspective seems to be tuned much more to my liking. So the added roominess of the Pilot is a bonus for us, though I will miss the efficiency of the CR-V around town. We'll probably end up with the Touring AWD, which is more than I want to spend. But it has a few features beyond the EX-L that make it "worth it" for me to go there instead of the EX-L AWD.

I too have zero interest in the FWD version.


Jeff the bigger question is will you be able to live with the ZF9?

For us as long as you leave the paddles alone its actually not a bad trans, of course we resolved the intercooler issue with the tow package which helped as well.



I'm learning to deal with it. My biggest gripe is that the first 4 gears aren't quite close enough together, particularly 2nd and 3rd. At least that's what I think I was complaining about while out on the trails. I'd be in 3rd, want for a bit more torque, click it, and then it would race to almost redline in 2nd.

But for everyday living it's plenty smooth and somewhat "normal" feeling and it didn't seem to have so much of that downshifting over-rev-matching of some of the other applications where after it freewheels for a bit too long, the car actually ACCELERATES momentarily instead of providing the desired engine braking effect.

The 10AT would've been ideal for sure. Or give me a properly geared 8AT and I'd be happy.



Meanwhile, the 6AT in the Ridgeline is fabulous. A match made in heaven.

Triaque
Profile for Triaque
Re: Doesn't really split the difference between CR-V and Pilot, but it's still really good [View News Item]    (Score: 1, Normal) 01-29-2019 18:34
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
The ZF transmission doesn't sport shift at all. The design of the dog teeth gear sets at D4-D5 and D7-D8 cause the shift timing to be significant and with that given different driving conditions could make the vehicle accelerate forward to rev match to get the gears to mesh. I personally experience this in the D5-D4 paddle downshifts trying to engine brake. See my excerpt below to AHMC concerning this experience:


5.) 9 speed Auto Transmission D5 to D4 downshifts....under ANY conditions during the downshift the driver has to deliberately take action to brake rather than rely on engine braking to prevent running into another vehicle if in a follow behind situation. If the driver relies on engine braking AT ALL, the top speed of the vehicle will greatly increase WHEN the objective all along was to gear down for engine braking effect.
Since these new vans have no emergency brake pedal to use if all braking fails, I became very concerned when I noticed that the 9-speed revs the motor up and actually accelerates(pulls the vehicle forward) going down hill while downshifting. This is to such a level that the vehicle cannot engine brake itself. You absolutely HAVE to hit the brakes because it will not slow itself down.

So, when coasting down a 6% and steeper grade with no accel pedal at all.....the transmission does not gear down on its own at all. It will free wheel. Which is fine.

So, when the ACC cruise is engaged with the minimum follow distance set, on a 6% or steeper grade.....the transmission will sequentially downshift. Upon each downshift the engine throttle is blipped causing the vehicle to speed downhill a bit more.....and a bit more. When you get to the D5 to D4 downshift the throttle is agressively blippled and the van will speed ahead as if to pass. Sometimes speeds will reach 75MPH down hill and agressive braking is required by the driver. You then lose your preset ACC. You scare all your passengers. You scare the driver in the vehicle ahead of you. Knowing that I have no emergency brake pedal that I can modulate pressure/braking with the release handle on an incline SCARES ME. Once again, I am not doubting that this occurs, but I have not been able to recreate it while driving in this area.

So. When using STANDARD
cruise control set on a 6% or steeper grade.....the transmission will downshift. Upon each downshift the engine throttle is blipped causing the vehicle to speed downhill a bit more.....and a bit more. When you get to the D5 to D4 downshift the throttle is agressively blippled and the van will speed ahead as if to pass. Sometimes speeds will reach 75MPH down hill and agressive braking is required by the driver. You then lose your preset cruise control. Knowing that I have no emergency brake pedal that I can modulate pressure/braking with the release handle on an incline and no engine brake SCARES ME.

So. When using Paddle Downshifting with NO Cruise.
Downshifting manually using the minus paddle produces the same exact effect. Each sequential downshift from D7 slightly blips the throttle. Once you reach the D5 to D4 downshift the van aggressively accelerates for about 2 seconds and speeds forward. By that time the vehicle momentum has increased greatly along with velocity. The only thing you can do is brake when trying to slow this van down. Engine braking does not work. Its' always an over all speed increase.
THE ISSUES WITH THIS ARE SAFETY RELATED. THERES NO REAL ENGINE BRAKING ON GRADES ABOVE 5%. IF THE BRAKES WERE TO FAIL YOU CANNOT MODULATE AN EMERGENCY BRAKE PEDAL AND GET THE VEHICLE STOPPED. I WOULD NEVER HAVE PURCHASED KNOWING THAT THIS WAS NOT A HONDA TRANSMISSION AND THAT IS ACTS THIS WAY.....

DCR
Profile for DCR
Re: Doesn't really split the difference between CR-V and Pilot, but it's still really good [View News Item]    (Score: 1, Normal) 01-29-2019 18:39
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
...and why does it accelerate like that? I don't need more help to go into a ditch around here so I am not sure I want that behavior when I don't want that behavior.
Triaque
Profile for Triaque
Re: Doesn't really split the difference between CR-V and Pilot, but it's still really good [View News Item]    (Score: 1, Normal) 01-29-2019 18:56
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
See the detailed video explanation :

https://youtu.be/Z7EMGnjEhmE

ledebuhr1
Profile for ledebuhr1
Re: Doesn't really split the difference between CR-V and Pilot, but it's still really good [View News Item]    (Score: 1, Normal) 01-29-2019 19:07
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
Why is the fuel economy worse than the Pilot? Is the ZF AT9 less efficient than the Honda AT6? Or is it the bigger tires?

TonyEX
Profile for TonyEX
Re: Doesn't really split the difference between CR-V and Pilot, but it's still really good [View News Item]    (Score: 1, Normal) 01-29-2019 19:10
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
Ahem... we've been discussing the need for applying the brakes on the 5th to 4th downshift now here at ToV for... YEARS!

If you are driving fast in twisty bits, you will never need 5th gear anyhow. Take your TLX, put it in Sport mode Manual and stay at 4th and below. You will be going pretty fast and you will always have engine torque to vector your SH-AWD.

FWD only? Sorry, you should not be too worried about freewheeling and engine braking then. Just "sit right back" and drive it with the gas and brake pedals.

Triaque
Profile for Triaque
Re: Doesn't really split the difference between CR-V and Pilot, but it's still really good [View News Item]    (Score: 1, Normal) 01-29-2019 19:24
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
We were not talking about a TLX. We are talking about the similar behavior of the ZF-9 in this new Passport to the many various applications out there within AHMC.
xman
Profile for xman
Re: Doesn't really split the difference between CR-V and Pilot, but it's still really good [View News Item]    (Score: 1, Normal) 01-30-2019 12:55
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
ledebuhr1 wrote:
Why is the fuel economy worse than the Pilot? Is the ZF AT9 less efficient than the Honda AT6? Or is it the bigger tires?



This is posted above already. MPG loss is because of the added ground clearance compared to the Pilot.

On that note, I don't understand too much the point of this vehicle actually. If you want serious off road capability why buy a unibody in the first place? The size is nearly that of the Pilot. Price is not cheaper. Not more efficient. Less passenger capacity. I guess there is novelty factor somewhere that eludes me.

NSXman
Profile for NSXman
Re: Doesn't really split the difference between CR-V and Pilot, but it's still really good [View News Item]    (Score: 1, Normal) 01-30-2019 19:15
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
Isn’t the Jeep Grand Cherokee unibody? I guess it comes down to what you consider serious off road capability and if there is a market for moderate off road capability.

Looks like a good camping vehicle to tow a small fishing boat or small camping trailer, while also capable of traversing trails where you aren’t doing serious articulating and rock crawling. Those do exist.

TL_06
Profile for TL_06
Re: Doesn't really split the difference between CR-V and Pilot, but it's still really good [View News Item]    (Score: 1, Normal) 01-31-2019 11:11
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
Jeep Grand Cherokee has been unibody since its origin MY93. 2nd gen Pathfinders (96-04) were also unibody and recognized for off-road chops and durability. Some present Land Rovers and Range Rovers are unibody. One builds unibody for weight-savings, and for chassis stiffness contributing to on-road performance. Passport may not equal a 4Runner off-road but it's going to wipe the floor with 4Runner in every on-road metric.

IMHO, Honda's going for the rugged look as a marketing angle, and providing enough off-road capability that they don't embarrass themselves.

I'm surprised that Cd and effective frontal area are inferior to Ridgeline.

Cory
Profile for Cory
Re: Doesn't really split the difference between CR-V and Pilot, but it's still really good [View News Item]    (Score: 1, Normal) 02-04-2019 11:33
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
deanh wrote:
It feels like it really needs an EX trim or that they missed some key features on the Sport model. You cannot get a power driver's seat unless you get leather nor can you get CarPlay or BSI. It seems like a miss to me there.



Unless you really want the V6 I don't see the appeal of the Sport Trim Passport over a CR-V Touring. I just built an AWD Sport trim on Honda's site. It was missing a lot of options and still ended up at over $36k. The EX-L adds features that people will want but it easily ends up being $40k+. There has to be some room in that $4k gap between the Sport and EX-L for an EX trim.

In my opinion the Passport seems overpiced at every trim level. Unfortunately in the days of 80 month auto loans this is becoming the norm.

dootndo2
Profile for dootndo2
Re: Doesn't really split the difference between CR-V and Pilot, but it's still really good [View News Item]    (Score: 1, Normal) 02-04-2019 16:45
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
I want a 5 passenger Honda SUV that can tow a boat over 1500 lbs.

That's why I would buy it.

dootndo2

Cory
Profile for Cory
Re: Doesn't really split the difference between CR-V and Pilot, but it's still really good [View News Item]    (Score: 1, Normal) 02-04-2019 19:12
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
Point taken but the vast majority of SUVs are never going to tow anything.

For most “point A to B” buyers I don’t see the Passport being worth the extra cost over a CR-V. You’re losing a LOT of options for the bigger engine and somewhat larger interior.

I haven’t looked recently, are bottom trim Edges and Muranos equally low frills compared to their smaller upper trim counterparts?

dootndo2
Profile for dootndo2
Re: Doesn't really split the difference between CR-V and Pilot, but it's still really good [View News Item]    (Score: 1, Normal) 02-07-2019 14:54
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
Well, then I would say they kind of did it right. They made the tow package optional (add on). I think there still is a market for V6 powered vehicles. When I had my V6 J35, the fuel economy was rather good for what it was.

I can imagine that dealers will be selling it as the "5 passenger" Pilot. I do think there's a market for it. Is it worth the extra cash? In my opinion, mostly.

Cory
Profile for Cory
Re: Doesn't really split the difference between CR-V and Pilot, but it's still really good [View News Item]    (Score: 1, Normal) 02-14-2019 10:20
Reply to This Message Attach Quote to Reply
I was at the Chicago Auto Show yesterday and took a look at the Passport. I found it underwhelming. Based on the absence of people looking at it, I wasn't alone.

The one that I took the closest look at was an AWD Sport. As I've mentioned earlier, this trim with a few small options comes in at over $36k. In no way did it feel like a car that costs that much.

The lack of options was really noticeable throughout. Simplicity in something like a 4Runner or Wrangler can be kind of cool because of the function over luxury image but in the Passport it just came off as cheap. As much as Honda PR photos want you to believe that this is a rugged adventure mobile it isn't. Buyers are going to want some sense of comfort/convenience/luxury. It felt low rent throughout with the infotainment system as the most glaring example of cheapness. It wouldn't look nice in a Fit LX and it just looked terrible in a car costing over twice as much.

The seating areas are larger than those in a CR-V and the cargo area is deeper (but the load height seemed really high) but not to the point where it seemed any more comfortable or practical.

The only benefit that I can see that the Passport has over the CR-V is towing capacity but really, how many people shopping in this class ever use their hitch for anything more than a bike rack?


 
Thread Page - [1]
Contact TOV | Submit Your Article | Submit Your Link | Advertise | TOV Shop | Events | Our Sponsors | TOV Archives
Copyright © 2018 Velocitech Inc. All information contained herein remains the property of Velocitech Inc.
The Temple of VTEC is not affiliated with American Honda Motor Co., Inc. TOV Policies and Guidelines - Credits - Privacy Policy
29 mobile: 0