vader1

You make a good point on pickups being more useful, but most midsize trucks cost way more with a few options than lots of these CUV's. That is one reason they sell in higher numbers. The also ride better and get better mileage, but pickups are built for a more purposes than bulbous people haulers.

TheDonEffect

Ridgelines get 18-24mpg, or in other words, similar to a Pilot. I owned a Pilot, I got <20mpg. Newer should be a bit better, but I don't think by much. Crosstrek is rated at 27-34, we get 30mpg without trying, on roadtrips we get 35ish. That is sizable.

We also don't need a bed 99% of the time, it hauls everything we ever need easily, and the smaller footprint makes it much easier in driving aroud our urban environment. As it is, the Crosstrek just barely fits lengthwise in our garage. The Pilot wouldn't fit in our current configuration.

I wouldn't know if the Ridgeline drives better than the Crosstrek, I'll take your word for it that it does, but I don't think it'll drive so much better that it would make me rethink owning something sporty like the GRC. I don't want my cars to drive poorly of course, but I don't need everything to drive like it was tuned on a race track. CUVs prioritize comfort for the price over everything else, and in that it does a great job.

In short, it very much fits our life in a way the Ridgeline does not.

Further, Ridgelines start at 37k, I'm sure I could get some off of it but the Crosstrek sticker was 27 or 28 and I got a discount on top of that. We are still very happy with that purchase especially now that you can't get the very good faux leather interior on any trim level except for the top Wilderness trim now. Civics cost about the same, and they do drive better than the Crosstrek (I just helped my sister in law buying a new one), but not so much better that I'm willing to trade in all the utility of the Crosstrek for it.

Being lower to the ground and in a smaller form factor is sorta pointless until you get to at least a GTI/Si level of driving dynamics, or are saving a tremendous amount of money. Trim for trim, you're not saving a ton buying a Civic over an HRV/Crosstrek/etc, so if race car feel, even in tiny amounts, is that much more important over ground clearance and interior/cabin space, god bless have fun. For me, it makes no sense, if I'm going to buy an appliance, I want that appliance to work well for our needs.

TommyDeVito

As I already said, it’s a counterpoint. We don’t have to agree, said that too. The Ridgeline is not the only unibody smaller foot print truck out there now. They are numerous. I get 25 MPG’s out of mine. But it’s not a DD so it’s irrelevant. I mean unless you are a busy body slapping 15k, 20k miles per year on the ODO, MPG is just one metric. And I stated that I paid 33.5k for mine new. That isn’t 37k. MSRP’s are up across the board on everything. And I would never even consider a CUV nor a CVT transmission. My solution to CUV’s, move them all to Han’s Island, and nuke them from orbit. It’s the only way to be sure. Maybe we could get some more realistic vehicles at that point. This hatchback with a lift kit craze, but it’s not really built for hard off-roading, is laughable. That’s all CUV’s are, is a hatchback with a lift kit.

I was listening to this while reading this reply:
Subaru, GM, Honda, are all getting lawsuits put on them right now. They have all been reporting your driving behavior to LexisNexis, which is getting sold to insurance companies so these vehicle mfr’s are spying on you without your consent. People are getting their policies canceled and struggling to get another underwriter even at a 100% increase on the annual insurance cost. Thank God my Honda doesn’t have a SIM card from the manu in it and I disabled the Toyota spying bs before I drove it off the lot last year. Get yourself a CUV folks, that spies on you. Get a LexisNexis T-shirt!

TheDonEffect

Not looking for agreement, just counterpointing for the sake of conversation, exchanging ideas if you will.

MPGs especially here in CA where gas is about $5/gallon, for a vehicle that my wife is using to commute to work, is a considerable factor in an appliance vehicle. Couple that with over $5k in purchase price, a much larger footprint that won't fit in our garage for utility we will not use or benefit from 99% of the time, I don't see the point. Additionally, as I said, for the sake of this discussion I will concede that the Ridge drives remarkably well and better than the Crosstrek (I have not driven the Ridge, but again, for the sake of this discussion, I will concede these points), however I can confidently say it won't drive so well that it will make me question my GRC ownership, or really any hot hatch from a GTI upward.

Buying a Ridgeline for us would be like someone buying a Tahoe when a Honda Fit is all they need. I've driven Fits, I love Fits, they're great cars, they drive great, they don't so great that I'm willing to sacrifice the ground clearance and utility of a Crosstrek/HRV sized vehicle. There used to be an argument for MPGs for the smaller cars, but progress has gotten us to the point where that difference is so small now.

All things equal, I will take the option that has better driving dynamics. But things are not all equal, it costs more, it's unnecessarily (for our and many others particular use case) large, and gets worse gas mileage. Additionally, for day to day use, a hatch is better than a bed, especially when it rains.

As far as capability, you'd be amazed what people are doing with Crosstreks. It has the same ground clearance as your Ridge, shorter wheel base, there are lift kits, and it has a good enough AWD system. The only thing that makes me pause is the boxer engine layout, fortunately however I live in an area where support for Subarus is very strong, and because of their popularity every mechanic knows how to work on one.

There is nothing wrong with CUVs, just like there's nothing wrong with minivans, you just don't like them because of who you perceive are the drivers/owners of them. The irony here is that the Ridgeline is perceived to be the CUV of the truck world since it's not body on frame. Don't get me wrong, I much prefer the Ridge to many of the trucks out there, although my Hawaii upbringing won't let me buy one over a Taco, but aside from that I prefer the Ridge. Just saying, irony.

In summary, it's great that the Ridge works out for you. It doesn't fit our situation, the Crosstrek perfectly does.

QUIKAG

I'll throw the Silverado 3.0 Duramax in for anyone that needs a full-size truck. No, it doesn't handle great, it's a freaking truck, but man it's so smooth, torquey, quiet, nice riding. Interior is legitimately nice on the '22+ refresh as well. 30+mpg is realistic if willing to drive 70mph or under on the highway. Best to date is 32.4mpg on an easy highway drive for my 4wd Z51 model. Otherwise, it's mid to lower 20's if driving 80-90mph+ which is still awesome for a full-size truck. Rpm at 90mph is just under 2,000rpm so feels very under-stressed bombing down the highway. Never needs to downshift.

I can't say enough good things about how good the LM2/LZ0 3.0 Duramax is for smooth, quiet power with a ton of torque (495) at low rpm. Really the perfect half-ton truck engine for actual truck stuff. Reliability has been great so far on the powertrain since it came out in 2020. GM did good on this one. Definitely one of their better engines they've done.

TheDonEffect

I always felt the domestics for the most part did the quarter ton trucks well... but time and time again at around 100k miles they begin to show their worts, namely transmissions going out around that time. Where they did dramatically improve is interior quality since the early aughts, those interiors were terrible designed and put together. It's why Toyota got away for long selling the same V6 and V8s despite virtually everything else under the sun getting better mpgs with more power and cheap service intervals, it's that long term durability, at least preceived durability anyway.

It is pretty astonishing what they're able to do out of these huge vehicles these days.

ThreeD

Been livid about this
In Honda you can disable the data sharing features and totally disable the hondalink app from the app manager
Tesla has been doing this for years and your safety score affects your insurance. It's total BS
Same goes for some of the other companies but they should not be doing this whatsoever
Essentially selling your data that can negatively impact their own customer.
Are we the customer or are the insurance companies?
There has been so much backlash about this nationally I think all companies are shutting it down for now but you know when PR dies down they will try to sneak their way back in to earn a few bucks
Lucky for us in California telematics cannot be used to adjust your insurance rates but nonetheless a car that will snitch on you is total BS. Honda is dead to me.

TommyDeVito

No, sorry. It has nothing to do with the drivers/owners of them. Many of them are stupid, and you, and everyone else that can actually think knows this. Arguing for arguing sake is absolutely pointless. So many CUV’s are so beyond stupid it is laughable, like this one:
https://www.mbusa.com/en/vehicles/class/gla/suv

If I wanted to waste the time I could find 20 more. Many of them are rather pointless. I understand the Crosstek. It’s more lifted hatchback than CUV. You damn well know the CUV’s I’m talking about. You’re referring to the single one, and the one you own, vs. an entire market of them where many of them are beyond stupid. The buyer will never use any off-road nothing. No ground clearance nothing. It’s en vogue thing that people will look back on laugh. I actually liked the Honda Passport so there are a few of them I understand. Many of them have less of a hatch, then my daily driver hatch, like that MB mentioned above.

This isn’t a Ridgeline vs. Crosstek thing. You can start arguing about the Ridgeline but I did mention there are many unibody, compact trucks on the market now. You’d buy a Taco for image? Um…ok. My truck is used for mountain driving. Before I bought it I test drove every single truck on the market, and a wagon. It has more payload in the bed than a Raptor. That’s called functionality. And no things don’t get wet in the bed. There is this thing called a Tonneau cover, extremely common in the truck world. I have a Peragon and no nothing gets wet in the bed. I could have spent 20k more to buy a full size and “fit in” with people here as this is truck land. Every day you see more than you can count of Roush Fords, Raptors, lift kits, 33’s and bigger tires, and it’s a metro city with no dirt nothing anything close. These are all pavement trucks. I wanted driving dynamics. Unibody + SH-AWD = an excellent handling vehicle and perhaps the best pavement handling truck on the market. I wasn’t going to pay extra for towing capacity I’ll never use. Nor for “off-road” rock crawling and such because who actually does that? It does sand, dirt, gravel, just fine, as well as snow. And it is a truck, not a CUV. CUV’s don’t have a 1500 payload capacity in a bed.

I’m done wasting my time with this.

TommyDeVito

I agree. It’s whole brands I’m done with. You’re going to fink on me to LexisNexis and the insurance companies to make a few pennies? WTF? The opposite of customer loyalty. What gets me are performance models. Cammisa talked about the Vettes having this built in? Huh? A Corvette? Wow! Subaru, Honda, and GM are at the forefront of this. The crazy thing is the reporting on anything above 80 MPH, hard braking, hard acceleration. Just nuts. As I mentioned on my last car they had this functionality but allowed you to disable before you leave the lot with the vehicle and Toyotas, AFAIK, aren’t reporting this to Lexis. They are trying to sell their own insurance. Either way, far too intrusive.

TheDonEffect

Those turtle CUVs from Mercedes and BMW are god awful for sure, probably the worst vehicles ever conceived.