You can't fairly compare horsepower. HP is the same, but the Toyota has WAY more torque. I assume you're talking about the V8. But even the new Toyota V6 has more torque, and gas mileage should be very close when you look V6 to V6.
The fact still remains - if you want a real off-roader, get the 4Runner, and if you want a real people hauler, get the Honda.
The nice thing about this market is there's a different type of vehicle for different personalities...
look at pacodiablo... hes still looking for his Ford Ranger from the 80's puhahaha
For 26 K good luck getting the 2 WD 4 Runner dude...
BTW the new Lincoln Aviator... based on the Explorer fully loaded runs near $50 grand!!!!!!!!! I like the Navigator and even the look of the Aviator.... and believe it or not I even like the Cadillac Escalade EXT SUT... but their prices are absolutely rediculous......
The 4Runner for 90% of its buyers will never be more then a nice vehicle to take to the mall.... same as the Pilot. In that case for 90% of the buyers the Pilot makes a whole lot more sense.... Oh then why not buy a Odyssey or a Sienna?? Oh I forgot its actually an image thing!!!
the Pilot will do everything the 4 Runner did in that home made video of the black 2003 4Runner that someone made....
At its limits Im sure the 4Runner will be better but who's gonna treat their 35-40K ride like that?
the Pilot did pretty well if not better than most.
When 4Wheel Perterson magazine says the same thing about the Pilot, then I might give it a chance. But these kinda ratings from car magazines have zero validity in my book for any SUV vehicle they test. I have seen and heard their test articles. I love it when they say, the Honda Pilot is very smooth on the freeway and drives like a Cadilac on dirt roads, yet they say the 4Runner had a very harsh ride and was difficult to get in do to its height. Duhh!!! 4 Runners are true offroad vehicles with real 4x4 suspension designed for abuse, as the Pilot is an all wheel drive car with a SUV shell!
Also, please do not compare the Pilot to off road vehicles. Its is an all wheel drive car with an SUV body. Car bodies and car suspensions do not last long on rugged trails. I would feel more confident driving a Subaru off road then anything Honda builds.
Quote:
whos gonna treat their 35-40K ride like that?
I will and do that to my $33k Tundra every chance I get. Thats why I bought a 4x4. To use it for what it was designed for, not to look cool when shopping or dropping kids off to soccer games.
I will bet anyone here $5,000 dollars that the new 4 Runner V8 will destroy anything Honda makes in the woods. Let me rephrase that. Anything by Honda like their cars and SUVs, not their Quads, or motorcycles.
Acura_Bossman, I thought we already agreed that our terms of Off Road are different.
You look at off road as going sking on the weekends in the snow, driving on a dirt road to get to your favorite camping spot, and driving on the beach to enjoy the sunset. Any SUV can do this.
My definition of offroad is doing the MOAB, the Baja, the Las Vegas 200 and driving your vehicle on closed logging roads that have washed out trails do to snow runs. The MDX is not designed for this. Look at where Acura put the muffler at on the MDX. Underneath the rear suspension instead of above it. The first rock that you drive over that is over 9inches tall will take that muffler right off. Look at the underneath of the MDX, then look at the 4 Runners. Also why do you think Toyota left the solid axle in the rear of the 4 Runner? Because solid axles are alot stronger and provide more suspension travel. The MDX uses the same rear suspension as the Honda Van which is an independent setup. Not sure how you can say the Pilot, based off the MDX which is based off the Honda Van is just as capable as the 4Runner off road. I'm not picking on the MDX, as the Lexus RX300 would get owned by a 4 Runner as well.
The Honda Pilot is based off the MDX which is based off the Honda Van. Hence, the Honda Van if it was all wheel drive would be a capable 4X4. Hence if the Toyota Van was all wheel drive it would too be a capable 4x4 like the 4Runner.
Sequoia2003 ... Youre right... We did agree that our definitions of offroad were different...
One thing though... I never once said the MDX/PILOT was better OFFROAD then the Runner... The only thing I ahve been implying on this board is that the PILOT is a better buy for the money for MOST people that will use it for such things as skiing...
Not sure how you can say the Pilot, based off the MDX which is based off the Honda Van is just as capable as the 4Runner off road.
I NEVER SAID THAT!!
Maybe instead of just ORUV we should say its a RHSJBWTORUV (Rock Hopping Stump Jumping Bush Wacking True Off Road Vehicle) instead!!! submit that to Toyota...
Yes, 95% of the SUV owners out there the Honda Pilot is a much better buy than the 4Runner. Would I own a Honda Pilot, yes. If I was looking for a reliable, safe, weekend skiing vehicle that was priced around $30,000.
I like the MDX! I think that its one of the best looking SUV's on the market. I would love to own one too.
For my life style (hunting, fishing, Quading, mountain biking, hiking, camping, towing, and snow bording) the 4Runner is a better fit. I would not feel confortable driving a Honda Pilot on snow washed out roads, hill climbs and rocky trails.
This is one concern that maybe I should keep my Tundra. Not sure if the 4Runner will be up to the challenges that I will demand it. My Tundra has seen some very, very bad trails. So bad that there have been times that it's taken 2 full size rigs (Ford F250 diesel and Chevy Silverado) to pull me out.
Besides, what would my Pilot look like with BFG Mud Tires. I would get my @ss kicked if I showed up in the woods with that!
Besides, what would my Pilot look like with BFG Mud Tires. I would get my @ss kicked if I showed up in the woods with that!
LOL.... or how about those things they call Swampers? haha you made my butt laugh picturing any Honda with swampers on
Actually while working at Lexus I did see some BFG Mud Tires on a RX300 and yes they did look rediculous....
and looking at it from your side... If I had the time and I could afford to take my vehicle off road more often I would def choose the Runner ....
wait I ahve a Tundra and it hardly ever sees dirt!!!
I am going up to Mt Baker this weekend though and up to Whistler in Dec!! cant wait....
Originally posted by Acura_Bossman look at pacodiablo... hes still looking for his Ford Ranger from the 80's puhahaha
Hell yeah. Actually, I know where it is, I am just waiting for it to be up for sale. That truck was just as reliable as ANY Honda. It never broke down in all the years we owned it. Of course there is one thing Honda is better at...emissions. The Ranger failed almost all of it's emissions tests.
Maybe when the Pilot is body on frame I will like it. Until then, forget it. I would take a base model Mitsubishi Montero Sport or 4Runner over the Honda "SUV" any day!
1986, Ford Ranger is a very reliable rig actually, but my CD Player motor has more power. My brother in law had 87 Ford Ranger back in 1990 and it was a laugh getting it up the mountain pass.
Mitsubishi? No way! Coming from a guy who likes a company that kills its customers, your opinion on SUV is a little disreputable.
Though Mitsubishi have great vehicles and some very inspiring ideas, their SUV's are Unibody Construction. Unibody Construction is not well suited for serious off road capability or towing. Besides, their web site says they start at $31k. For another $ 3k I can get the V8 4Runner.
Linear Mode
