| waahuu |
Just bought 09 Pilot Touring, for anyone else who is shopping for SUV....compared to others in class:
GMC Acadia- sticker $5,000 higher than Pilot. good exterior styling, cheap interior materials (fake shiny chrome on dash), front sunroof does not open all the way (because of dual sunroofs, bad design), does not drive as well as Pilot. 10 inches longer than Pilot. no Bluetooth phone option (factory installed/integreted) probably not as reliable as Pilot
Mazda CX-9, incredibly bad headroom in drivers seat, my head was hitting the ceiling, was out of the dealer in 2 minutes. Why buy a truck with less headroom than a civic?
Acura MDX - drives great, quality interior, more features but $6,000 more than Pilot, and less space
Toyota Highlander - comparable pricing, smaller interior (not by much), 3rd row seat not split, pretty sure there is no option for memory seats, doesn't drive/perform as well as Pilot.
Pilot- Honda got it right with features, packaging, driving/performance, ride, etc. We didn't like the styling initially but grew on us. We have had it a week and like how it looks even more (clean, solid look). Like most Hondas the more you drive it, the more you find how well thought out and well made it is. We are glad we bought it. Got a good deal on it.
Hope this helps for anyone else looking around |
|
|
| netman88 |
| Thanks for the comments. |
|
|
| CalPi |
Congrats on the new purchase! and on number 4 of 2009 owners! :2:
Also i might add this but, :needpics: |
|
|
| cheesehead7 |
| You said you got a "good deal on it". Willing to share? I am in the market for a Touring model but have been waiting to see if prices are going to come down. Dealers in my area said they were dealing on everything except Touring models. But that was 2 weeks ago. |
|
|
| colorider |
Congrats waahuu and thanks for the comparison!!!!
:) |
|
|
| Pairallel |
Welcome to the Gen 2 Owners Club...growing fast! Also to the hondapilot.org site....
When you get a chance, post your buying / pricing experience and your impressions on the other 2009 threads.
:4: |
|
|
| craniotes |
quote:
Originally posted by waahuu
Acura MDX - drives great, quality interior, more features but $6,000 more than Pilot, and less space
While I'm the first to admit that the 2nd generation MDX does indeed drive better than any SUV/CUV has a right to, it doesn't have more features than the Pilot Touring. In fact, it actually has less in some regards. [Note: I'm comparing the Pilot Touring to the MDX Sport/Entertainment -- top dog to top dog]
To wit: The Pilot Touring has integrated window shades in the rear windows, parking sensors, fore/aft adjustable 2nd row, separate HVAC vents for the 3rd row, standard towing package, and standard roof rails. To add the rails, trailer package and parking sensors (rear only, I should add) to the MDX will cost you about $2K if you go for a dealer-install. The extra vents, window shades, adjustable 2nd row, and front parking sensors aren't available at any price.
True, the MDX Sport/Ent has the trick SH-AWD system, semi-active electromagnetic suspension, 50 more horses (only noticable if you thrash it), SportShift, and self-leveling HIDs, which for some, this will be enough to justify the price difference. However, for what 90% of the buying public are looking for in an SUV, the Pilot Touring is the clear choice. Heck, if you compare the Touring to an MDX with just the Tech/Ent packages, the MDX loses the ADS suspension and self-leveling HIDs (they're still HIDs, they just won't adjust to your ride hight anymore).
Regards,
Adam |
|
|
| waahuu |
The dealer I bought from was very reasonable. I don't want to give the exact amount but I got over $2,000 off of sticker for the touring model. We looked at a comparable MDX (w/navi, tech pkg) and the Acura dealer was aggressive with discounting so the offer from Acura was pretty close to the sticker for the Pilot. That would make it reasonable for the Honda guy to negotiate on the price for the touring. Even at sticker the Pilot is a very good value, with discounting even more so. The other SUV we were seriously considering was the Acadia but with a sticker of $4k to $5k over the Pilot sticker for pretty much same capability and features, just doesn't make sense to pay that much more for a GM product over Honda. Unless of course you just don't like the way the Pilot looks.
In regard to the exterior styling I know there are lots of opinions here is my take.... I really got to like the box look, at the end of the day thats why I need a crossover SUV to get as much interior space as possible without driving a boat like a Tahoe, Expedition, etc. The box works as far as optimizing interior space and I really like the look. I think some SUV's are starting to go over the top on styling and sacrificing space/utility. The only other point is the front end, here the Acadia wins but the Pilot front end looks continue to grow on me (yes like a fungus). |
|
|
| danpilot |
The New York Times has a review of the 2009 Pilot at
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/08/a...&pagewanted=all
"Only Pretending it's a brute"
They make a superficial comparison with the Toyota Highlander, mainly on interior room (Pilot is better) and engine (Toyota gets 1 mpg more),
and conclude
"The new Pilot isn’t perfect, but it is impressive in its flexibility, road manners and safety equipment. Its biggest problem is that although it is a car-type crossover, it masquerades as an S.U.V. brute, a look that may scare off Americans looking for a vehicle that won’t savage the bank account." |
|
|
| sblvro |
quote:
Originally posted by craniotes
While I'm the first to admit that the 2nd generation MDX does indeed drive better than any SUV/CUV has a right to, it doesn't have more features than the Pilot Touring. In fact, it actually has less in some regards. [Note: I'm comparing the Pilot Touring to the MDX Sport/Entertainment -- top dog to top dog]
To wit: The Pilot Touring has integrated window shades in the rear windows, parking sensors, fore/aft adjustable 2nd row, separate HVAC vents for the 3rd row, standard towing package, and standard roof rails. To add the rails, trailer package and parking sensors (rear only, I should add) to the MDX will cost you about $2K if you go for a dealer-install. The extra vents, window shades, adjustable 2nd row, and front parking sensors aren't available at any price.
True, the MDX Sport/Ent has the trick SH-AWD system, semi-active electromagnetic suspension, 50 more horses (only noticable if you thrash it), SportShift, and self-leveling HIDs, which for some, this will be enough to justify the price difference. However, for what 90% of the buying public are looking for in an SUV, the Pilot Touring is the clear choice. Heck, if you compare the Touring to an MDX with just the Tech/Ent packages, the MDX loses the ADS suspension and self-leveling HIDs (they're still HIDs, they just won't adjust to your ride hight anymore).
Regards,
Adam
Actually the SH-AWD is not just a trick system. It has torque vectoring where it splits the rear wheels and make the outer wheels turn more than the inner wheel on a turn -similar to the AYC/ACD of the mitsubishi evolution IX(overseas) and X(US) known for their handling prowess beating out the lotus exige and 911 carrera. with that alone, it is worth it. the rest are just luxury items and of course better looks than the pilot. if I'm in the market for one the MDX would be a better choice this time around. |
|
|
| craniotes |
quote:
Originally posted by sblvro
Actually the SH-AWD is not just a trick system. It has torque vectoring where it splits the rear wheels and make the outer wheels turn more than the inner wheel on a turn -similar to the AYC/ACD of the mitsubishi evolution IX(overseas) and X(US) known for their handling prowess beating out the lotus exige and 911 carrera. with that alone, it is worth it. the rest are just luxury items and of course better looks than the pilot. if I'm in the market for one the MDX would be a better choice this time around.
Right you are, and yes, I do enjoy the technology applied (it really does reduce understeer and allow one to corner with confidence). As a matter of fact, BMW has adopted a similar system with its new xDrive.
In any case, the point I was trying to make is that for many who view SUVs as appliances, torque-vectoring doesn't mean as much as more interior room, rear window shades and the ability to run on regular gas.
Regards,
Adam
PS - I meant "trick" as a compliment. ;) |
|
|
| RedCandy |
I am also a new '09 owner (I was actually probably the first to buy one on this board - 5/24 - but the 5th to post). I bought a Dk. Cherry Pearl w/black interior Touring.
I agree completely with the comparison above. We were mainly looking at an MDX (couldn't hack the premium gas and sticker), the Acadia (I needed a shorter vehicle to get in and out of my garage) and the Highlander. I felt the Pilot really got the options right for the price. I couldn't buy the HL for four main reasons: very soft steering, no memory seats, no 60/40 3rd row and to load the DVD player you had to do it up by the screen - not good for a mom of two.
I am loving my Pilot. The reverse and front sensors along with the back up camera are fantastic. Love the bluetooth as well. Even the "little" things like the sunshades are so well thought out. And call me crazy, but I even love the grill and the overall exterior styling (I like boxy). I've added cross bars and step rails (big help for the kiddos).
I, however, did not get $2000 off MSRP (in fact, they sort of laughed at me when I asked for that). But did get $750 off and the cross bars thrown in. I was coming off of a lease and needed a vehicle, so I didn't have much time to wait for prices to come down.
Question - maybe too early for anyone to know yet - but I bought a cargo box for the roof for a long a trip we are taking. It looks like it's going to sit over my GPS antenna - has anyone tried one up there yet? Will this be a problem?
Anyway - just wanted to introduce myself and give you my .02. |
|
|
| colorider |
Welcome aboard RedCandy and thanks for adding to the comparison! Don't forget to post some pics or you will get hit with
:needpics: |
|
|
| Josey92 |
Is it my imagination, or are the 09 owners not posting pics of their new rides? So far I've only seen one.
:confused: |
|
|
| colorider |
quote:
Originally posted by Josey92
Is it my imagination, or are the 09 owners not posting pics of their new rides? So far I've only seen one.
:confused:
Maybe they are too busy driving them!!!
;) |
|
|
| mkaresh |
Thanks for the comparisons, I always enjoy reading these.
Can you go into any further detail on how the handling compared to the Acadia? |
|
|
| Josey92 |
quote:
Originally posted by colorider
Maybe they are too busy driving them!!!
;)
Good point, but with all this talk about gas prices and less than stellar MPGs our Pilots get, You'd think someone would have one sitting in the driveway.
:D |
|
|
| sblvro |
quote:
Originally posted by Josey92
Good point, but with all this talk about gas prices and less than stellar MPGs our Pilots get, You'd think someone would have one sitting in the driveway.
:D
still in denial and checking each tank of gas-the mileage:3: |
|
|
| waahuu |
| no big issues with the acadia handling, it drives very well. However, compared to the Pilot the Acadia seemed to hesitate when accelerating occasionally, the brakes where not as good in the Acadia, and sometimes the ride felt jittery in the Acadia. The Pilot has smoother ride and still handles well. |
|
|
| mkaresh |
Owners of the Acadia often complain about the transmission, so you're not alone in noticing hesitation.
On the jittery ride, do you know if the one you drove had the 18-inch tires or the 19s?
I'm personally used to cars, so just about any SUV feels jittery to me on all but the smoothest roads. |
|
|
| MK23666 |
| Would love to see side by side pics of last year Pilot and this year Pilot together |
|
|
| waahuu |
quote:
Originally posted by mkaresh
Owners of the Acadia often complain about the transmission, so you're not alone in noticing hesitation.
On the jittery ride, do you know if the one you drove had the 18-inch tires or the 19s?
I'm personally used to cars, so just about any SUV feels jittery to me on all but the smoothest roads.
Don't know what size wheels, it was their top of the line, I think SLT-B.... |
|
|
| RedCandy |
quote:
Originally posted by colorider
Welcome aboard RedCandy and thanks for adding to the comparison! Don't forget to post some pics or you will get hit with
:needpics:
\
Cut me a little slack - it's been raining here like the world is ending (after 100+" of snow this winter...), so the ride isn't looking so pretty right now. After she gets washed again (if the rain ever ceases) I'll post. I can't be too busy driving because so many of our highways and roads are flooded. |
|
|
| mkaresh |
quote:
Originally posted by waahuu
Don't know what size wheels, it was their top of the line, I think SLT-B....
The 19s would still have been an option. If you'd had a good salesperson, they'd have asked whether you were more interested in handling (where the 19s have a slight edge) or ride comfort (where the 18s have a larger but still modest edge) and selected a vehicle for you to drive accordingly.
But maybe one salesperson in 100 would actually do this. |
|
|
| gawalla |
quote:
Originally posted by craniotes
While I'm the first to admit that the 2nd generation MDX does indeed drive better than any SUV/CUV has a right to, it doesn't have more features than the Pilot Touring. In fact, it actually has less in some regards. [Note: I'm comparing the Pilot Touring to the MDX Sport/Entertainment -- top dog to top dog]
To wit: The Pilot Touring has integrated window shades in the rear windows, parking sensors, fore/aft adjustable 2nd row, separate HVAC vents for the 3rd row, standard towing package, and standard roof rails. To add the rails, trailer package and parking sensors (rear only, I should add) to the MDX will cost you about $2K if you go for a dealer-install. The extra vents, window shades, adjustable 2nd row, and front parking sensors aren't available at any price.
True, the MDX Sport/Ent has the trick SH-AWD system, semi-active electromagnetic suspension, 50 more horses (only noticable if you thrash it), SportShift, and self-leveling HIDs, which for some, this will be enough to justify the price difference. However, for what 90% of the buying public are looking for in an SUV, the Pilot Touring is the clear choice. Heck, if you compare the Touring to an MDX with just the Tech/Ent packages, the MDX loses the ADS suspension and self-leveling HIDs (they're still HIDs, they just won't adjust to your ride hight anymore).
Regards,
Adam
Hello, new member to the forum. I just drove a 2009 Pilot today and found I really liked it, but thought the nav/display UI seemed somewhat clunky and had a hard time providing good audible matches to my voice (no accent to speak of unless I have a few cocktails, then you can't get away from the Mississippi drawl! :D).
My wife has separately driven the Pilot and MDX (she has an 03 MDX now that we are seeking to replace). She loves the MDX's drive quality and tech integration/UI, but we were hoping for a bit more space (so the Pilot fits that bill perfectly, of course).
Can anyone here comment on the differences between the nav/input systems (i.e, not just navigation differences, but other input differences like for climate control, etc.) between the MDX and the Pilot? I am having a ton of trouble getting a Honda salesperson that can even explain what the Pilot can do (the salesman today didn't even know that the 2nd row folded down, for instance), much less tell me the differences. It's quite frustrating, and enough to make me want to skip over the Pilot on principle - because the Acura guys are great, knowledgeable salespeople and generally better to deal with.
My questions center around capability differences, (I understand that only the MDX has XM traffic), functional differences, etc.
thanks in advance for any help or guidance you can provide - and if there is a website or info source out there with this info, please feel free to point me there - I am asking here because I can't seem to find it anywhere else.
thanks! |
|
|
| mkaresh |
If you perform a price comparison on my site, it will also list feature differences. I don't think this will get into all the detail you're looking for, but it might get some of it.
Car price comparisons |
|
|
| mkaresh |
One difference my site doesn't list for formatting reasons is seats. The MDX has a two-person third row, the Pilot has a three-person third row.
The biggest difference, though, is how they look and how they drive. |
|
|
| waahuu |
we did compare the Pilot Touring and MDX. From what we saw the tech features are pretty much the same except for the Nav Traffic. We have used the voice recognition and it works well for entering destination, Handsfree Link, and commands for the Nav, climate control, etc.
The Pilot has the iPod/MP3 integration which the MDX doesn't have yet.
Don't think there are any good websites to compare features but if you want to dig thru owners manuals....
https://techinfo.honda.com/rjanisis...001_OMANUAL.asp |
|
|
| gawalla |
quote:
Originally posted by waahuu
we did compare the Pilot Touring and MDX. From what we saw the tech features are pretty much the same except for the Nav Traffic. We have used the voice recognition and it works well for entering destination, Handsfree Link, and commands for the Nav, climate control, etc.
The Pilot has the iPod/MP3 integration which the MDX doesn't have yet.
Don't think there are any good websites to compare features but if you want to dig thru owners manuals....
https://techinfo.honda.com/rjanisis...001_OMANUAL.asp
Thanks much for your response. I thought the MDX did have the MP3 integration? It says so in my brochure ... is it different somehow? |
|
|
| mkaresh |
The MDX has an MP3 input. This permits a player to play through the audio system, but you cannot control it using the car's controls.
For full iPod integration, where you control the iPod using the cars controls and see it's info on the car's screen, my understanding is you need both an aux in and a USB port, and a special cable to connect both to the player. Probably some software in the car as well. |
|
|
| craniotes |
quote:
Originally posted by gawalla
Thanks much for your response. I thought the MDX did have the MP3 integration? It says so in my brochure ... is it different somehow?
The 2009 MDX will have full iPod/USB integration, but as mkaresh pointed out, the 2007-8 models have simple AUX integration (i.e. you can play them through the stereo, but you can't control them through the NAV system).
So, as it stands, if you go for a Pilot Touring over a Tech/Ent MDX -- the most "apples to apples" model, IMO -- you'll get iPod integration, rear-window shades, parking sensors, more room, and the trailer package. What you'll miss are HIDs, LED taillights/brake lights, 50hp (no biggie, IMO), SportShift (kind of like this feature), and the torque-vectoring SH-AWD (love this feature). Of course if you add the MDX's Sport package to the mix then you'll also miss the electromagnetic adaptive suspension, which isn't available on the Pilot. Of course this package adds $2500 to the price of the MDX (completely worth it, IMO).
Regards,
Adam |
|
|
| waahuu |
As Mkaresh replied there is a big difference, MDX only has input for sound,you still need to use the controls on the your iPod. Pilot has full integration.
So with an iPod/iPhone/ you just use the same cable to connect to the USB port on the car that you use to connect to laptop .Thats it. Once you plug in all you music files/folders/ can be navigated using the Nav screen and controls. No need for extra cables, multiple connections, or special software/setup. Chk some of the other threads, others have used flash drives as well. |
|
|
| gawalla |
thanks guys, this answers my question perfectly.
I think I will try to take home a pilot for a day to see it in better "action" than just around the dealership.
I will post back! |
|
|
| deparson |
Don't leave out the JGC Overland. Fully loaded the 08 Overland can be had for ~33k and a Limited with similar equipment to the Pilot for well under 30k.
Yes, gas mileage is lower (with the 5.7l) but not a great deal lower in real world use and of course there is far more power. They are very different vehicles but they do need to be considered in the same class for many people. |
|
|
| mkaresh |
If he's looking at a Pilot, I assume he wants a third row. So the JGC won't do.
There are a number of more car-like two-row crossovers that might be alternatives if a third row isn't needed. |
|
|
| deparson |
Good point. If he needs 3 rows then the Jeep is out.
That said, the Jeep is really a 'cross over' now that they went to a unibody frame in the GC. You still have the full off-road ability of generations past but with a car like ride.
quote:
Originally posted by mkaresh
If he's looking at a Pilot, I assume he wants a third row. So the JGC won't do.
There are a number of more car-like two-row crossovers that might be alternatives if a third row isn't needed.
|
|
|
| techgirl |
I'm fairly certain that the JGC has always been a unibody vehicle. I owned a 1994 and a 2000 JGC. I liked both vehicles and was very fortunate that they both were fairly reliable vehicles for over 150,000 miles. The only major issue was having to replace the A/C evaporator coil on both around the 4 year mark - A very expensive repair since it supposedly requires pulling the dash.
We would have bought and almost did buy a 2008 JGC to replace the 2000, but decided that we liked the 2008 Pilot better - easier access to the 2nd row seating, more 2nd row leg room, better handling, better effective power with a V6 and better historical residual value. The third row wasn't an absolute requirement, but we did consider as a "nice to have".
In the current JGC, only the V8 based models are really fully off-road capable. The 4WD system in the V6 models is a single speed automatic full-time transfer case without a low range option.
Due to the pending release of the 2009, we couldn't find a 2008 Pilot EX-L Navi in the color that I wanted. Too bad because the pricing for the JGC and 2008 Pilot EX-L Navi were really close. We thought about the MDX with Tech Package, but were turned off by the Premium Fuel requirement, scared off by the $40K plus MSRP and wanted a more utility focused vehicle.
So we decided to wait for the release of the 2009 Pilot. We still preferred the 2009 Pilot over the 2008 JGC for the same reasons as the 2008.
While I think we bought the 2009 for an excellent price considering that it was the 2nd day that it was on-sale, it was almost $8,000 more than we could have bought a somewhat similarly equipped 2008 JGC X-Package with Navigation and Backup Camera. |
|
|
| mkaresh |
Techgirl is correct. The JGC has always been unibody. Not only that, but the compact Cherokee introduced in 1983 was a unibody.
Unibody construction alone doesn't make an SUV a crossover. |
|
|
| btsnipes |
| Agree, just bought a 09 EXL, looked at everything out there. I feel I got a good bang for the buck.... |
|
|
| ocwill1 |
tested the following vehicles:
Chrysler Aspen - Nice power with the Hemi, but rode more like a truck than an SUV..
Chrysler Pacifica - Nice ride, good power in 4.0 V6, but only had room for 6... Needed at least 7, so it was out.
Toyota Highlander Hybrid - Good power output, nice ride, but a little lacking in space in 3rd row.
Buick Enclave - Best ride of them all, however with 275 HP, it seemed like it was struggling to get out of its own way.. Navigation in it could not be manipulated while driving. That and the lack of power sent us packing.
Ended up with Pilot Touring w/RES 2wd Dark Cherry Pearl w/Black interior... Ride is not as good as Buick, but it is still nice and plenty of room... |
|
|
| mailmanwes |
i to had crossbars thrown in, they are very noisy, took them off, thinking of getting 450 crossroad from thule, to go on and off easier than factory bars.
Anyone else expeirience noisy crossbars |
|
|
| RedCandy |
| I have factory cross bars and haven't noticed a noise issue at all (then again my Nissan Quest was so loud perhaps anything seems quiet). |
|
|
| Sportymonk |
quote:
Originally posted by mailmanwes
i to had crossbars thrown in, they are very noisy, took them off, thinking of getting 450 crossroad from thule, to go on and off easier than factory bars.
Anyone else expeirience noisy crossbars
Don't know about the 09's but previously, if the crossbars on the roof were installed fgacing the wrong way, they made noise but once turned around correctly, everything was fine. |
|
|
| waahuu |
I've got the crossbars and don't have any noise. The truck is pretty quiet.
So you can't change the Navi with the Buick Enclave when the car is moving? Thats pretty limiting......glad we didn't go for the Buick |
|
|
| ocwill1 |
quote:
Originally posted by waahuu
So you can't change the Navi with the Buick Enclave when the car is moving? Thats pretty limiting......glad we didn't go for the Buick
Correct.. Salesman at dealer actually rolled his eyes when I told him that it was a disappointing feature, wasn't real happy about that reaction.. That and the power was lacking for 275 hp.... |
|
|
| gawalla |
quote:
Originally posted by ocwill1
Correct.. Salesman at dealer actually rolled his eyes when I told him that it was a disappointing feature, wasn't real happy about that reaction.. That and the power was lacking for 275 hp....
This is the same for the whole GM lineup I think - my wife drove the Acadia and that was one of the biggest reasons we didn't go that route - not to mention the whole tech interface and integration (or lack thereof with no BT) was really piss-poor compared to Honda/Acura.
They are doing themselves a real disservice, methinks. |
|
|
| ocwill1 |
quote:
Originally posted by gawalla
This is the same for the whole GM lineup I think - my wife drove the Acadia and that was one of the biggest reasons we didn't go that route - not to mention the whole tech interface and integration (or lack thereof with no BT) was really piss-poor compared to Honda/Acura.
They are doing themselves a real disservice, methinks.
I am pretty sure teh Enclave had BT, but do not know how good it was.. I am used to Honda/Acura BT and it is very nice.. My Nissan Altima BT is pretty good as well.. I just got a call from the Buick dealer and they are offering employee pricing to me on the Enclave, I told him I bought the Pilot and he seemed PO'd and hung up.... |
|
|
| mailmanwes |
| do u have sunroof, i wonder if less soundproof with sunroof and crossbar noise. i have to look again but i thought bars looked the same on both sides. |
|
|
| gawalla |
quote:
Originally posted by ocwill1
I am pretty sure teh Enclave had BT, but do not know how good it was..
All the GM reviewers have complained about this lack of simple tech integration. BT is not an option in any of them. You can make handsfree calls in the cars, but you use OnStar, for which you need a separate phone number. Very 1990's. |
|
|
| RedCandy |
quote:
Originally posted by mailmanwes
do u have sunroof, i wonder if less soundproof with sunroof and crossbar noise. i have to look again but i thought bars looked the same on both sides.
I have a sunroof, too. |
|
|
| mailmanwes |
thanks for info on cross bars
dealer assured me they were installed correctly, i took them off reversed them and no noise thanks again:) |
|
|
| deparson |
I agree that no BT in GM cars is lame and short sighted but if you happen to have Verizon family plan you can add your car for $10/month.
Since the car's cellular radio is much more powerful than a handset you are likely to get better call quality/reception in more areas which could be a plus for many. You also don't need to have your handset with you of course so if you leave it at home, etc you can still call while in the car.
quote:
Originally posted by gawalla
All the GM reviewers have complained about this lack of simple tech integration. BT is not an option in any of them. You can make handsfree calls in the cars, but you use OnStar, for which you need a separate phone number. Very 1990's.
|
|
|
| ocwill1 |
quote:
Originally posted by deparson
I agree that no BT in GM cars is lame and short sighted but if you happen to have Verizon family plan you can add your car for $10/month.
Since the car's cellular radio is much more powerful than a handset you are likely to get better call quality/reception in more areas which could be a plus for many. You also don't need to have your handset with you of course so if you leave it at home, etc you can still call while in the car.
Not sure if the OnStar phone has improved any, but we had a 2003 Trailblazer and we had the phone and it was terrible.. If it was raining, then the reception was shaky at best.. Calls kept cutting in and out.... Hopefully in the last 5 years it has gotten better |
|
|
| GreenMachine |
quote:
Originally posted by ocwill1
Not sure if the OnStar phone has improved any, but we had a 2003 Trailblazer and we had the phone and it was terrible.. If it was raining, then the reception was shaky at best.. Calls kept cutting in and out.... Hopefully in the last 5 years it has gotten better
There was a story not too long ago about how how GM owners with the ONstar that uses analogue phone signal will soon be S.O.L. and there's nothing they can do about it.
The one thing that I have always liked about ONstar is the automatic crash notification.
The MDX used to offer ONstar. |
|
|
| fallen |
quote:
Originally posted by CalPi
Congrats on the new purchase! and on number 4 of 2009 owners! :2:
Also i might add this but, :needpics:
Seriously? There are only 4 '09 owners on here?? How did you come up with that (did you include me?)? |
|
|
| CKinNC |
| three has to be more thna just 4 folks with the 2009. did you count me??????? :rolleyes: |
|
|
| Sportymonk |
that post was made on 6/12/08, a month and a half ago. ;) The economy may be tough but I am sure a few more have joined.
quote:
Originally posted by fallen
Seriously? There are only 4 '09 owners on here?? How did you come up with that (did you include me?)?
|
|
|
| techgirl |
We're definitely over four (4) '09 owners, from a quick look at a few threads:
ddaudelin - 2009 Touring
tomd - 2009 Touring
techgirl - 2009 Touring
fallen - 2009 EX
CKinNC - 2009 Touring
ocwill1 - 2009 Touring w/RES
pairallel - 2009 EX-L
RedCandy - 2009 Touring
LeedDog - 2009 Touring
lengds - 2009 Touring
marcw - 2009 Touring w/RES
ONIJDM - 2009 Touring
waahu - 2009 Touring
rkrzyston - 2009 unknown
D2LA - 2009 Touring w/RES
jhorstma - 2009 Touring w/RES
kph3 - 2009 EX
gawalla - 2009 Touring
mmike87 - 2009 Touring
funkho - 2009 Touring
sewers - 2009 Touring w/RES
afs12065 - 2009 Touring w/RES
cheeshead7 - 2009 Touring w/RES
shorepilot - 2009 Touring w/RES
jc9394 - 2009 Touring w/RES
Pilot09 - 2009 EX-L
JoeFixes - 2009 Touring
kph3 - 2009 EX
rsbell - 2009 Touring w/RES
mace69 - 2009 Unknown
My apologies if I left anyone out or didn't post your type of ride correctly. |
|
|
| fallen |
| Wow... so many Tourings. I feel... poor. :o |
|
|
| techgirl |
quote:
Originally posted by fallen
Wow... so many Tourings. I feel... poor. :o
I was surprised by the number of Touring and Touring w/RES owners as well. |
|
|
| cheesehead7 |
quote:
Originally posted by techgirl
I was surprised by the number of Touring and Touring w/RES owners as well.
For me it was because the Touring offers so many options at a reasonable price, especially when you compare it to the Acadia and other similar models. |
|
|
| Buckwheat |
All of these threads say that they have the touring model yet not one person is posting a picture with their reply.
Still have not seen one on the road or parked in any trim level.:confused: |
|
|
| Silver_ZHP |
quote:
Originally posted by fallen
Wow... so many Tourings. I feel... poor. :o
:jester:
That's funny. Hey don't feel bad, we just bought an 08 EX (no -L!). There were not EX-L's left in the color/equip we wanted. But we did have aftermarket leather installed. Got to say, the aftermarket stuff looks and feels better than the oem. But.... you don't get the bun warmers and we will miss them!
We also drove the Acadia. Love the overall interior and exterior design and that dark red is absolutely beautiful, no such color for the 08 Pilot. Impressive cargo space with all seats down, nice and FLAT too. Drove and handled well, yet also seemed so heavy and sluggish. The economy-oriented transmission shift programming made the Acadia feel heavy and lazy. You really have to mash the throttle to get the transmission in the proper gear even when you need just a little extra oomph. That's one thing I really like about our Pilot, the shift programming is a little more sporting and it always seems to be in the right gear. You don't really have to mash the pedal when you need just a little zing.
I do agree with the few other posts that are scattered about. There are occasions when the Pilot seems to heave over on its springs a bit more than I expect. Every Accord and Civic we've owned has been rather firm and I expected just a bit more body control in the Pilot. I'm sure the GY tires are partly to blame, but they are not the cause of what I consider less-than-typical-for-Honda body control. It would be interesting to know if the MDX springs/dampers/anti-sway bars are different (more sporting) and can be fitted to the Pilot. My searches are coming up empty.
Anyway..... We are loving this vehicle! |
|
|
| deparson |
At least on the 05s moving from the GY Integrity to GY Fortera Tripletread made a significant different.
quote:
Originally posted by Silver_ZHP
:jester:
That's funny. Hey don't feel bad, we just bought an 08 EX (no -L!). There were not EX-L's left in the color/equip we wanted. But we did have aftermarket leather installed. Got to say, the aftermarket stuff looks and feels better than the oem. But.... you don't get the bun warmers and we will miss them!
We also drove the Acadia. Love the overall interior and exterior design and that dark red is absolutely beautiful, no such color for the 08 Pilot. Impressive cargo space with all seats down, nice and FLAT too. Drove and handled well, yet also seemed so heavy and sluggish. The economy-oriented transmission shift programming made the Acadia feel heavy and lazy. You really have to mash the throttle to get the transmission in the proper gear even when you need just a little extra oomph. That's one thing I really like about our Pilot, the shift programming is a little more sporting and it always seems to be in the right gear. You don't really have to mash the pedal when you need just a little zing.
I do agree with the few other posts that are scattered about. There are occasions when the Pilot seems to heave over on its springs a bit more than I expect. Every Accord and Civic we've owned has been rather firm and I expected just a bit more body control in the Pilot. I'm sure the GY tires are partly to blame, but they are not the cause of what I consider less-than-typical-for-Honda body control. It would be interesting to know if the MDX springs/dampers/anti-sway bars are different (more sporting) and can be fitted to the Pilot. My searches are coming up empty.
Anyway..... We are loving this vehicle!
|
|
|
| citivas |
quote:
Originally posted by craniotes
The 2009 MDX will have full iPod/USB integration, but as mkaresh pointed out, the 2007-8 models have simple AUX integration (i.e. you can play them through the stereo, but you can't control them through the NAV system).
According to two dealers (in the US anyway) I talked to, the '09 MDX STILL doesn't have iPod/USB integration. Neither sounded like they were guessing either. They both had looked into it before I asked and were upset, saying they couldn't understand why Honda put it in the new Pilot but not the '09 MDX, especially when it is now in some other updates of Acura vehicles. |
|
|
| citivas |
As someone who just went through the search process, and ended up with the ’09 Pilot (as my first Honda), here’s my take.
I test drove and researched almost the entire “CUV” spectrum over a 3 month period, including the GMC line (Arcadia, Buick Enclave), the Ford Flex, etc. I did multiple test drives of the Pilot, Toyota Highlander (4 tests), Mazda CX-9 (3 tests), Acura MDX (2 drives). I even test drove most of the luxury lines with 3 rows, including the BMW, Mercedes, Volvo, Audi, etc.
Of all of these, I ended up focusing on the Pilot, Highlander, CX-9 and MDX. I wanted to like the Highlander, especially the Hybrid, because we have owned several Toyota’s and Lexus’ and been very happy in every case. I just couldn’t get over the major compromises in the Highlander, other than its fuel economy which is best in class even in the non-hybrid. (The Hybrid we ruled out because it wasn’t worth a $12K plus premium over the exactly same equipped non-hybrid Limited version). The Toyota has a decent interior (minus the really fake looking wood trim), decent acceleration and great tech functionality in its nav and RES system. But it’s the only CUV in the class with a third row that doesn’t split, forcing you to choose between people or luggage on a trip (or to awkwardly throw the luggage onto the seats). The nav locks out user input when you drive. The RES completely blocks the rear view. And they don’t offer memory seats or mirror functions even as an option on the Limited. They also don’t have any factory hitch so even if you buy the tow prep option you have to get the dealer to install an awkward after-market hitch.
I liked the CX-9, a lot actually. It looks good, inside and out, and drives better than any other CUV in the class except the MDX, for a LOT less. They just really blew it on the cabin tech. The nav is the same company as Toyota’s but with a dim screen and uninspired GUI. Neither it or the Toyota allow voice control of climate or the radio. If you use sat radio you lose the aux input (no iPod integration in it or the Toyota) unless you pay to get an after market a/b switch. You have two choices on the RES, one that is a large “pop out” that can play GBA games but sticks down far and totally kills your rear view or another that is comparable to the Pilot but is incompatible with the moon roof. Plus I read too many horror stories about problems created by Mazda dealers service centers. (BTW, not sure how tall the earlier poster who complained about head room in the CX-9 was, but I am 6'1" and had no problems in any row. Is it possible you were in the smaller CX-7?)
The MDX is a nice ride and interior and shares the best integrated nav in the class with the Pilot (I would have preferred touch screen still but functionally it is the best). It even has the real-time traffic option, which the Pilot does not. But it loses major points for seating. Besides seating only 7 on paper, neither of the 3rd row seats or the or the middle seat in the second row are suitable for an adult. I had to bend my neck sideway in each case. And the MDX is behind the times in not having easy access to the third row. That pretty much ruled it out for us. If I didn’t need the third row I would be looking at other vehicles anyway. I also didn’t like the lack of iPod integration or the MPG (worse than the Pilot), which adds insult to injury with the requirement for premium fuel.
So we settled on the Pilot. It wasn’t love, I’ll admit. While I understand the look is polarizing, we fit in the not lovin’ it camp. We didn’t love the look of the inside either, particularly the front passenger area and the use of so many dark, hard plastics (dust magnet!). I also don’t like the ride as much as the MDX, CX-9 or even the Highlander. It is more sluggish, less responsive. But the ride is “fine” and the look grows on you – actually resembles my old Explorer. I wish they had the beige leather combined with more exterior options (settled for the Nimbus Grey), but again no big deal.
I’ve only had it a couple days but the family is happy so far. I LOVE the nav system. I had a 4 year old (top-of-the-line at the time) Garmin after-market that this blows away. It seems competitive with the latest top Garmin and Tom-Tom’s except for not using text-to-speech for calling out street names and the lack of real-time traffic and other data. I was impressed it had 3D active lane guidance and it worked beautifully. I like all the steering wheel controls and the HandsFreeLink. I think the new Pilot is the best in class for cabin tech right now, with the only real competitor being the new Ford Flex. And I have been surprised how often I can get the ECO mode to work at various driving speeds, including at freeway cruising speeds like 70 MPH. |
|
|
| mkaresh |
I always love reading how people decide which vehicle to buy, so thanks for providing such a thorough account.
Interesting that it takes a top in-car nav system to match the functionality of the much less expensive portable units. I drove my father's Cadillac CTS recently, and its nav was much harder to use than the Garmin I bought a few months ago. |
|
|
| citivas |
quote:
Originally posted by mkaresh
I always love reading how people decide which vehicle to buy, so thanks for providing such a thorough account.
Interesting that it takes a top in-car nav system to match the functionality of the much less expensive portable units. I drove my father's Cadillac CTS recently, and its nav was much harder to use than the Garmin I bought a few months ago.
Yeah that bugs me too. I wish the major car cos would start licensing their systems from major GPS consumer product providers like Garmin and Tom Tom. Ideally the systems would be software upgradeable too -- not just the mapping but the features. As it stands you have to decide between the major convenience of an integrated system versus the cost and feature advantage of an after-market product. I went integrated this time because I made exactly the opposite decision last time and regretted it. My Garmin (at the time) was way better than the internal solutions and saved me money, but the pain and unsightliness of having to put it on my dashboard and plug it into the outlet for power meant I didn't use it nearly as often as I would have. And I told myself I would take it on vacation with me for rental cars but never did. I prefer the system integrated with the car audio and doubling as a rear camera and great audio control screen. |
|
|
|
