Honda Car Forum

Dana Rohleder wrote:
>
<SNIP>

> My biggest complaint, and the complaint of most owners so far is lack of
> fuel efficiency. I drive almost entirely on the highway between 55-65 mph
> and have yet to break the 16 mpg barrier.

---------------------------

Should have bought a VW Toureg first.

You'd be dancing a jig to own a Ridgeline after a Toureg . . :-)

'Curly'

zzzzzzzzzzzz Sorry - fell asleep for a couple weeks while I added a Mazda
Miata to the fleet. Anyway....

So far I haven't used the bed other than hauling air. I added a ReTrax cover
for it to help keep out the snow (so's I can git to the trunk in the winter)
and improve the mileage. Didn't do much for the mileage, but does keep the
snow out.

BTW, I do not live in an area that has reformulated gas - that is Metro NYC,
not all of NY state. Lately, the mileage has crept up to 17 mpg with nostly
highway driving. now we are over $3.00/GAL up here.

Boreal


"Gordon McGrew" <gRmEcMgOrVeEw@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:nhif32d7hhmn4jdcga8j1jlecgh656dmsn@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 07 Apr 2006 09:12:49 -0700, SoCalMike
> <Mikein562athotmail@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>> My biggest complaint, and the complaint of most owners so far is lack of
>>> fuel efficiency. I drive almost entirely on the highway between 55-65
>>> mph
>>> and have yet to break the 16 mpg barrier. Since it is listed as 16
>>> City/21
>>> Hwy, I am not too impressed. It will likely increase slightly as it
>>> breaks
>>> in, but I think claims of AVERAGE 21 mpg Hwy was a little optomistic, if
>>> not
>>> downright fraudulent.
>>
>>you live in an area that uses reformulated gas? if so, blame the EPA.
>
> Also, driving 55-65 means you are driving faster than the EPA mandated
> speed for the test. That makes a big difference in a vehicle like
> this. Add in the fact that the EPA numbers are optimistic anyway and
> you can count on some breathtaking numbers at the pump.
>
> Out of curiosity, for what and how often do you use the bed? (In your
> truck, I mean ;-)

On Wed, 19 Apr 2006 09:15:35 -0400, "Dana Rohleder"
<boreal@charter.net> wrote:

>zzzzzzzzzzzz Sorry - fell asleep for a couple weeks while I added a Mazda
>Miata to the fleet. Anyway....
>
>So far I haven't used the bed other than hauling air. I added a ReTrax cover
>for it to help keep out the snow (so's I can git to the trunk in the winter)
>and improve the mileage. Didn't do much for the mileage, but does keep the
>snow out.
>
>BTW, I do not live in an area that has reformulated gas - that is Metro NYC,
>not all of NY state. Lately, the mileage has crept up to 17 mpg with nostly
>highway driving. now we are over $3.00/GAL up here.
>
>Boreal

Thanks, glad you are getting better milage. Warmer weather may be
helping too.

>
>
>"Gordon McGrew" <gRmEcMgOrVeEw@mindspring.com> wrote in message
>news:nhif32d7hhmn4jdcga8j1jlecgh656dmsn@4ax.com.. .
>> On Fri, 07 Apr 2006 09:12:49 -0700, SoCalMike
>> <Mikein562athotmail@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>> My biggest complaint, and the complaint of most owners so far is lack of
>>>> fuel efficiency. I drive almost entirely on the highway between 55-65
>>>> mph
>>>> and have yet to break the 16 mpg barrier. Since it is listed as 16
>>>> City/21
>>>> Hwy, I am not too impressed. It will likely increase slightly as it
>>>> breaks
>>>> in, but I think claims of AVERAGE 21 mpg Hwy was a little optomistic, if
>>>> not
>>>> downright fraudulent.
>>>
>>>you live in an area that uses reformulated gas? if so, blame the EPA.
>>
>> Also, driving 55-65 means you are driving faster than the EPA mandated
>> speed for the test. That makes a big difference in a vehicle like
>> this. Add in the fact that the EPA numbers are optimistic anyway and
>> you can count on some breathtaking numbers at the pump.
>>
>> Out of curiosity, for what and how often do you use the bed? (In your
>> truck, I mean ;-)
>

--
satyr #1953
Chairman, EAC Church Taxation Subcommittee
Director, Gideon Bible Alternative Fuel Project
Supervisor, EAC Fossil Casting Lab

BTW, I forgot to mention that I purchased a Scan Guage on Amazon.com and it
is a pretty nice piece of equipment. < http://www.scangauge.com/ > It has a
trip computer as well as the normal code-reader functions. Interestingly,
there doesn't seem to be a big difference in fuel consumption with the
Ridgeline between driving at 55 or 70 mph. Above 70 it starts to drop some,
though. I think this is pretty normal with newer cars, contrary to some
other people's opinions. It wasn't true in large vehicles built more than 10
years ago, but most of them now should do pretty well at 65 mph. BTW, $3.09
for 87 octane yesterday in Plattsburgh, NY.

Boreal

"Gordon McGrew" <gRmEcMgOrVeEw@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:d55e421l5ro6m0i98h6spl8dpq67i7oq58@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 19 Apr 2006 09:15:35 -0400, "Dana Rohleder"
> <boreal@charter.net> wrote:
>
>>zzzzzzzzzzzz Sorry - fell asleep for a couple weeks while I added a Mazda
>>Miata to the fleet. Anyway....
>>
>>So far I haven't used the bed other than hauling air. I added a ReTrax
>>cover
>>for it to help keep out the snow (so's I can git to the trunk in the
>>winter)
>>and improve the mileage. Didn't do much for the mileage, but does keep the
>>snow out.
>>
>>BTW, I do not live in an area that has reformulated gas - that is Metro
>>NYC,
>>not all of NY state. Lately, the mileage has crept up to 17 mpg with
>>nostly
>>highway driving. now we are over $3.00/GAL up here.
>>
>>Boreal
>
> Thanks, glad you are getting better milage. Warmer weather may be
> helping too.
>
>>
>>
>>"Gordon McGrew" <gRmEcMgOrVeEw@mindspring.com> wrote in message
>>news:nhif32d7hhmn4jdcga8j1jlecgh656dmsn@4ax.com. ..
>>> On Fri, 07 Apr 2006 09:12:49 -0700, SoCalMike
>>> <Mikein562athotmail@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>> My biggest complaint, and the complaint of most owners so far is lack
>>>>> of
>>>>> fuel efficiency. I drive almost entirely on the highway between 55-65
>>>>> mph
>>>>> and have yet to break the 16 mpg barrier. Since it is listed as 16
>>>>> City/21
>>>>> Hwy, I am not too impressed. It will likely increase slightly as it
>>>>> breaks
>>>>> in, but I think claims of AVERAGE 21 mpg Hwy was a little optomistic,
>>>>> if
>>>>> not
>>>>> downright fraudulent.
>>>>
>>>>you live in an area that uses reformulated gas? if so, blame the EPA.
>>>
>>> Also, driving 55-65 means you are driving faster than the EPA mandated
>>> speed for the test. That makes a big difference in a vehicle like
>>> this. Add in the fact that the EPA numbers are optimistic anyway and
>>> you can count on some breathtaking numbers at the pump.
>>>
>>> Out of curiosity, for what and how often do you use the bed? (In your
>>> truck, I mean ;-)
>>
>
> --
> satyr #1953
> Chairman, EAC Church Taxation Subcommittee
> Director, Gideon Bible Alternative Fuel Project
> Supervisor, EAC Fossil Casting Lab

On Thu, 20 Apr 2006 08:24:08 -0400, "Dana Rohleder"
<boreal@charter.net> wrote:

>BTW, I forgot to mention that I purchased a Scan Guage on Amazon.com and it
>is a pretty nice piece of equipment. < http://www.scangauge.com/ > It has a
>trip computer as well as the normal code-reader functions. Interestingly,
>there doesn't seem to be a big difference in fuel consumption with the
>Ridgeline between driving at 55 or 70 mph. Above 70 it starts to drop some,
>though. I think this is pretty normal with newer cars, contrary to some
>other people's opinions. It wasn't true in large vehicles built more than 10
>years ago, but most of them now should do pretty well at 65 mph. BTW, $3.09
>for 87 octane yesterday in Plattsburgh, NY.
>
>Boreal


Their web site says they are out of stock for now and does not show
the price. How much did you pay for yours.
Thanks,.

I bought mine on Amazon.com for $130. See link below:

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00...lance&n=172282


"damn" <someone@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:tqtg42lr11qcdea698kh35cdc1ckd4l9i5@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 20 Apr 2006 08:24:08 -0400, "Dana Rohleder"
> <boreal@charter.net> wrote:
>
>>BTW, I forgot to mention that I purchased a Scan Guage on Amazon.com and
>>it
>>is a pretty nice piece of equipment. < http://www.scangauge.com/ > It has
>>a
>>trip computer as well as the normal code-reader functions. Interestingly,
>>there doesn't seem to be a big difference in fuel consumption with the
>>Ridgeline between driving at 55 or 70 mph. Above 70 it starts to drop
>>some,
>>though. I think this is pretty normal with newer cars, contrary to some
>>other people's opinions. It wasn't true in large vehicles built more than
>>10
>>years ago, but most of them now should do pretty well at 65 mph. BTW,
>>$3.09
>>for 87 octane yesterday in Plattsburgh, NY.
>>
>>Boreal
>
>
> Their web site says they are out of stock for now and does not show
> the price. How much did you pay for yours.
> Thanks,.

Thanks. i placed myself on the waiting list as they state there is a
newer version coming out.

On Fri, 21 Apr 2006 08:07:05 -0400, "Dana Rohleder"
<boreal@charter.net> wrote:

>I bought mine on Amazon.com for $130. See link below:
>
>http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00...lance&n=172282
>
>
>"damn" <someone@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:tqtg42lr11qcdea698kh35cdc1ckd4l9i5@4ax.com.. .
>> On Thu, 20 Apr 2006 08:24:08 -0400, "Dana Rohleder"
>> <boreal@charter.net> wrote:
>>
>>>BTW, I forgot to mention that I purchased a Scan Guage on Amazon.com and
>>>it
>>>is a pretty nice piece of equipment. < http://www.scangauge.com/ > It has
>>>a
>>>trip computer as well as the normal code-reader functions. Interestingly,
>>>there doesn't seem to be a big difference in fuel consumption with the
>>>Ridgeline between driving at 55 or 70 mph. Above 70 it starts to drop
>>>some,
>>>though. I think this is pretty normal with newer cars, contrary to some
>>>other people's opinions. It wasn't true in large vehicles built more than
>>>10
>>>years ago, but most of them now should do pretty well at 65 mph. BTW,
>>>$3.09
>>>for 87 octane yesterday in Plattsburgh, NY.
>>>
>>>Boreal
>>
>>
>> Their web site says they are out of stock for now and does not show
>> the price. How much did you pay for yours.
>> Thanks,.
>

I was looking at one in the dealership. I was surprised they only used one
cable to hold the rear bed door in the down position.


"Stan Dupp" <sdupp@netscape.net> wrote in message
news:e0oco6$p3m$1@emma.aioe.org...
> Thinking about buying a Ridgeline. Any Ridgeline Owners in this group
> care to share the pros & cons on this truck.

That can certainly be a con, but the pro is that it can open like a door,
making it easier to load stuff into the bed. I believe the tailgate is rated
at ~350 #. When you think about it, the only time a tailgate needs to supprt
a lot of weight is loading/unloading. If the tailgate opens to the side, you
don't even need to slide the item onto the tailgate to unload it.

2006 Ridgeline RTL S/R

"Art" <begunaNOSPAMPLEASE@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:a1c5g.11936$Es3.3623@newsread3.news.atl.earth link.net...
>I was looking at one in the dealership. I was surprised they only used one
>cable to hold the rear bed door in the down position.
>
>
> "Stan Dupp" <sdupp@netscape.net> wrote in message
> news:e0oco6$p3m$1@emma.aioe.org...
>> Thinking about buying a Ridgeline. Any Ridgeline Owners in this group
>> care to share the pros & cons on this truck.
>
>