Ridgeline Production Cut Again

[ANTAUS]

When Honda cuts production because of a huge inventory, it's described by the media as "keeping it lean"....

 

LINK-Autoweek.com

[foxrun]

When Honda cuts production because of a huge inventory, it's described by the media as "keeping it lean"....

 

LINK-Autoweek.com

How will they word it when they have layoffs (down weeks). It is coming, and with no support or protection alot of the laborers will be upset.

Edited February 10, 2006 by foxrun

[range]

How wil they word it when they have layoffs (down weeks). It is coming, and with no supprt or protection alot of the laborers will be upset.

 

 

 

not a problem, they probably have temporary workers (some day laborers they picked up next to Home Depot?) they'll just quietly let go.

Edited February 10, 2006 by range

[taxman100]

not a problem, they probably have temporary workers (some day laborers they picked up next to Home Depot?) they'll just quietly let go.

 

I know Honda hires tons of temps from Adecco to work for them, so they will probably just let them go.

[range]

I like the part about the 151 day supply of Ridgelines and the "Heavy dealer incentives and lease promotions " that were required to push the crap off the lots.

[2005Explorer]

And according to the media this was supposed to be the "truck" that was going to knock the F150 down a couple of notches on the sales charts? :D

[J2D]

Maybe this is Honda's way of getting all those Ford vehicles out of their employee parking lots.

[bec5150]

I think the Ridgeline is a joke as well, but I need to remind everyone of something. Remember the first generation Odyssey? 4 cyl engine, overgrown station wagon, but not big enough to be a van. It sucked too. Remember what Honda came out with for the 2nd gen in 1999? Honda will learn from this, and the second generation Ridgeline will be much better.

 

I am HOPING that Ford takes a few of the good ideas from the Ridgeline and integrates them into their trucks. Honda will listen to their customers and they will take a second shot at the Ridgeline. When they do, it will be a much better effort.

[silvrsvt]

I think the Ridgeline is a joke as well, but I need to remind everyone of something. Remember the first generation Odyssey? 4 cyl engine, overgrown station wagon, but not big enough to be a van. It sucked too. Remember what Honda came out with for the 2nd gen in 1999? Honda will learn from this, and the second generation Ridgeline will be much better.

 

I am HOPING that Ford takes a few of the good ideas from the Ridgeline and integrates them into their trucks. Honda will listen to their customers and they will take a second shot at the Ridgeline. When they do, it will be a much better effort.

 

 

But thats the thing...I doubt Honda is going to come out with a BOF truck like Nissan or Toyada. The Ridgeline is fundementally flawed from the get go that there is no chance of polshing this turd without a cleansheet. Or they can be like Toyada and still dont get it after 3 generations of trucks :lol:

Edited February 12, 2006 by silvrsvt

[bec5150]

May I remind you that the original Hummer H1 is unibody as well. So are all airplanes. Heck, take a look at an 18 wheeler pulling a box trailer down the road. See a frame? THere is none These trailers haul over 60K pounds without a frame. Unibody works for a truck, and there is a benefit in torsional stiffness and NVH reduction. The reason "real" trucks use a BOF is so you can easily change length and body configuration. Furthermore, Honda's frame is there, welded to the unibody. There's nothing wrong with the body or the frame. I crawled under it at the auto show and it's pretty stout. Now the suspension is another story.

 

But the Ridgeline is what it is, a truck that is a compromise because they had to use their production capacity at a minivan/SUV plant to manufacture. And, to be honest, 99% of the buyers will love it. You know, the ones that buy a Jeep Wranger to go to the mall.

 

But it still sux, it's still a gas hog, under "torqued" in the engine department, and really REALLY needs a dedicated platform.

 

You wanna know the real truth? I think Honda was just getting their feet wet to see if there is even a demand for a Honda truck, enough demand to justify a separate manufacturing plant. Companies like Honda and Toyota operate at such a profit margin that not all of their products need to be an "out of the park" home run. THey can do little experiments like the Ridgeline.

Edited February 12, 2006 by bec5150

[range]

But thats the thing...I doubt Honda is going to come out with a BOF truck like Nissan or Toyada. The Ridgeline is fundementally flawed from the get go that there is no chance of polshing this turd without a cleansheet. Or they can be like Toyada and still dont get it after 3 generations of trucks :lol:

 

 

LOL, you got that right.

 

Honda can't even get the Acura RL sedan right after repeated attempts, sales are falling as bad as the Ridgeline.

 

The Ridgeline's problems go much deeper than the original Odyssey. The Ody was sized for the Japanese market not the US.

 

Honda can't base virtually every car on the Accord platform, let alone base a "truck" on it.

 

The Ridgeline is and will remain a laughing stock of the "truck" world.

[bec5150]

The Ridgeline is and will remain a laughing stock of the "truck" world.

I remember similar comments being made about Civics and Corollas in the early 70's. I remember similar comments being made about the Hyundai Excel in the mid 80's. I remember similar comments being made about the Toyota Van in the mid 80's.

 

Who knows, maybe you're right. If history is any indicator, it's unlikely.

[RichardJensen]

Unibody works for a truck, and there is a benefit in torsional stiffness and NVH reduction. The reason "real" trucks use a BOF is so you can easily change length and body configuration.

Actually, those two sentences skip over a HUGE reason for BOF trucks:

 

Isolation of the bed from the cab.

 

The added bracing of the pickup bed, if it is attached to the cab, are the reasons for the incredibly ugly, dysfunctional sail panels on the Ridgeline, and the flying buttresses on the Avalanche.

 

With an open box, unibody--unless properly braced--reduces torsional stiffness.

 

With BOF, you can have two separate body components completely isolated from each other, but on the same frame, thus if one component is particularly prone to flexing (the box), it does not twist the other component (the cab).

 

But yeah, chassis configuration is also an important reason for BOF.

 

...

[bec5150]

Oh, Honda properly braced this chassis. That's why the damn thing weighs a gazillion pounds and can't get over 15MPG if it's driving 50MPH with a tailwind. I didn't think you could make any vehicle unladden with a 3.5L V-6 get under 15MPG but Honda did it.

 

Just to show you how ridiculous this design is, my parents Honda Odyssey on the highway gets right at 29MPG with a similar engine. ANd the Ridgeline averages in the real world under 15MPG.

[range]

I remember similar comments being made about Civics and Corollas in the early 70's. I remember similar comments being made about the Hyundai Excel in the mid 80's. I remember similar comments being made about the Toyota Van in the mid 80's.

 

Who knows, maybe you're right. If history is any indicator, it's unlikely.

 

 

Like I said, Honda still can't even get the Acura RL right. I don't hold out much hope they will get the Ridgeline right. The vehicle shows a remarkable misunderstanding of the marketplace.

[06StangAwesomecar]

I am Extremly happy the Ridgecrap isnt selling, and I will be even happier when there other products end up like the Ridgecrap, so I can go on there forums and rip them about there product and their employees and wish them unemployment and suffering like they do to the domestic employees, "What comes around goes around"

[RichardJensen]

Oh, Honda properly braced this chassis. That's why the damn thing weighs a gazillion pounds and can't get over 15MPG if it's driving 50MPH with a tailwind.

Apparently, Honda went the opposite of the Toyota/Nissan route.

 

Lacking the generational knowledge that DCX, GM, and Ford have amassed when it comes to engineering trucks, Toyota and Nissan early on apparently went the "Why are these things so heavy, we can get rid of a lot of this" way, where it seems Honda went the "this has to be tough" way.

 

Ironically, if Honda wanted to go the BOF route, with a V8, they would likely, first time out, come up with a better truck than Toyota or Nissan.

 

I am no admirer of Toyota, but Honda is (recent blunders and unfortunate recent styling efforts aside) a very well run auto manufacturer. They "know their place", which is not to say I think they belong in the cabin out back, but that they are content to achieve incremental growth on the strength of established products (Ford is apparently also coming to "know their place"). The Accord, for instance, outsells the Camry to retail buyers, and it is (IMO) a better midsize than the Camry, even factoring in its drunken Pininfarina designer looks.

 

...

Edited February 12, 2006 by RichardJensen

[J2D]

I didn't think you could make any vehicle unladden with a 3.5L V-6 get under 15MPG but Honda did it.

 

Damn, I can get that kind of milage with my 5.4 E-150 conversion van.

[silvrsvt]

May I remind you that the original Hummer H1 is unibody as well.

 

WRONG

 

[bec5150]

I worked on Hum-v's for years, and they have the same structure as the Honda, a frame that is welded to the unibody. Honest, I wouldn't lie to you.

[one2gamble]

I remember similar comments being made about Civics and Corollas in the early 70's. I remember similar comments being made about the Hyundai Excel in the mid 80's. I remember similar comments being made about the Toyota Van in the mid 80's.

 

Who knows, maybe you're right. If history is any indicator, it's unlikely.

 

 

they were, at that time so those comments are actually correct and the ridgeline is in fact the laughing stock of the truck world *right now*.

[bec5150]

I can't argue that, but some folks here said it will "always be" the laughing stock, and I can't agree with that. To do so is very dangerous, which was my point.

[marc-o]

I can't argue that, but some folks here said it will "always be" the laughing stock, and I can't agree with that. To do so is very dangerous, which was my point.

 

Yeah I would have to agree. I think the Ridgeline is a mistake myself, but the point is dismissing the competition is something that got the Big 3 where they are now - in deep financial trouble. It's what got Mercedes in trouble, it's what got VW in trouble, it's what got MG out of business. Basically, anyone who assumes people will just stick with their product forever ends up in deep trouble sooner or later.

 

The exact same thing comes up regarding Hyundai and Kia and the new Chinese automakers... well 15 years ago people didn't even think Hyundai would survive, let alone become one of the top 10 (I think it's number 5?) automakers in world. Well surprise surprise... take your eye off the ball and look what happens.

 

The first generation minivan Honda put out was totally inadequate to compete with the rest of the market, but the 2nd generation pulled the rug under everyone else... even with the spotty auto tranny issue, it still got the almost unanimous (as far as I know it's unanimous, but I'll cover my ass and say it's not I'm sure some people disagreed) approval of the industry as the new standard. Its features (stowaway seating) were immitated and improved, set the new standard. I coudln't care less about minivans, but I gotta say, if someone dismissed the first generation entry as a pathetic attempt, they would have been absolutely right - then 5 years later they would have been proved that it doesn't matter, because the Odyssey has one of the most enviable reputations amongst minivans. Things can change pretty quick if you're not paying attention...

[range]

The problem for Honda has been while Honda was unsuccessfully trying to get into a new market like trucks, they shifted investments from other areas.

 

For example, Honda had a mild hybrid on the market first, but they dropped the ball and let Toyota come in and dominate the market. This is an area where Honda was first and could have made a splash.

 

To make matters worse for Honda, Ford moved in with a full hybrid before Honda. I expect the Fusion Hybrid will beat a full hybrid Accord to the market too.

 

So while Honda was dickin around spending resources on a half-baked non-truck, Toyota cruised into the end-zone for a Super Bowl touch down.

 

As for the larger Odyssey, that really set the marker for when Honda's quality started its decline.

 

With 13 recalls, the Odyssey was the poster boy for Honda's quality problem.

 

The inadequate transmission design lead to a series of embarassing recalls, expanded recalls, more recalls, extended warranties and other bad press. This was at a time when the rest of the manufacturers, including the Koreans, were increasing their own quality and relaibility.

 

You now have a situation where Hyundai leads Honda in some categories of quality (at a lower price)

 

If anyone doubts Honda's reputation has been damaged, you only need to look at the recent increase in Honda's warranty period. Compaines do this when they have a feel they need to be more competitve in the quality area. (Hyundai's 10 year warranty, Chryslers old 7/70 warranty). Companies don't do this for fun of it.

 

So again, Honda took their eye off the ball when it came to hybrids and quality during the time they were developing this non-truck.

Edited February 12, 2006 by range

[bec5150]

The problem for Honda has been while Honda was unsuccessfully trying to get into a new market like trucks, they shifted investments from other areas.

 

For example, Honda had a mild hybrid on the market first, but they dropped the ball and let Toyota come in and dominate the market. This is an area where Honda was first and could have made a splash.

 

To make matters worse for Honda, Ford moved in with a full hybrid before Honda. I expect the Fusion Hybrid will beat a full hybrid Accord to the market too.

 

So while Honda was dickin around spending resources on a half-baked non-truck, Toyota cruised into the end-zone for a Super Bowl touch down.

 

As for the larger Odyssey, that really set the marker for when Honda's quality started its decline.

 

With 13 recalls, the Odyssey was the poster boy for Honda's quality problem.

 

The inadequate transmission design lead to a series of embarassing recalls, expanded recalls, more recalls, extended warranties and other bad press. This was at a time when the rest of the manufacturers, including the Koreans, were increasing their own quality and relaibility.

 

You now have a situation where Hyundai leads Honda in some categories of quality (at a lower price)

 

If anyone doubts Honda's reputation has been damaged, you only need to look at the recent increase in Honda's warranty period. Compaines do this when they have a feel they need to be more competitve in the quality area. (Hyundai's 10 year warranty, Chryslers old 7/70 warranty). Companies don't do this for fun of it.

 

So again, Honda took their eye off the ball when it came to hybrids and quality during the time they were developing this non-truck.

You really are thick. Honda has had a Hybrid Accord for the last two years. Granted, it's a V-6 and it's priority is performance rather than fuel economy, but it is a full on hybrid.

 

As far as the Odyssey, it's a horrible. With poor reliablity, massive recalls. It's a complete piece of trash. Well, for a Honda. It's still 10 times better than any Windstar. GO ask my father.

 

As far as Honda haveing to move recources, not so fast. See, Honda has this really cool thing that Ford doesn't know much about. IT's called "operating capital", a direct result of "profits" caused when you can sell product without having to throw thousands on the hood to get someone to buy it.

:)

Edited February 13, 2006 by bec5150