Most of us thought the Pilot would walk away with the title in this comparison test. After all, it's based on our perennial minivan favorite, the
Odyssey; it's loaded with standard features, including a DVD system; it was the only one with a third-row seat; and it's a Honda. How could it lose?
For one driving dynamics. Our editors unanimously thought it felt too sluggish and cumbersome. We felt this way even though its 3.5-liter V6 generates 240 horsepower (second only to the
Murano), enough to move the big Pilot with authority. In fact, it was only half a second behind the top-of-the-heap
Mitsubishi in the 0-to-60-mph track test at 8.5 seconds and 0.2 second behind the Murano. Its quarter-mile speed was also second best of the four, but the Pilot's bulk (at 4,439 pounds, it was the heaviest in the test) held it to a last-place finish (57 mph) in the 600-foot slalom test.
During the 60-to-0-mph braking test, the Honda's considerable avoirdupois pushed it to the back of the pack once again. It needed 134.2 feet to complete the stop, nearly 7 feet more than the
Highlander and almost 14 feet more than the Endeavor. We also didn't care for the Pilot's brake pedal feel, finding it too soft. And, despite its good showing in the acceleration tests, the Honda felt like a bit of a wallowing bear on the road. The steering was numb, and the Pilot had a tendency to understeer around tight corners.
Although opinions regarding its exterior design were largely negative most taking issue with its prosaic, boxy form the Pilot had the most road presence of all the vehicles in the test. Add to this its large greenhouse and all-round excellent visibility, and it was the vehicle that made us feel most secure and confident. (This feeling is supported by the fact that the Pilot received the maximum five stars in front- and side-impact crash testing by the NHTSA.)
Our test Pilot was a top-of-the-line EX model, loaded with standard features, such as leather upholstery, DVD entertainment system, seven-speaker audio system and a fold-flat 60/40-split third-row seat. All that and it was still within a few hundred dollars of the rest of the field.
The cabin won kudos for its storage space, ease of ingress and egress, nine cupholders and well-marked buttons and secondary controls. The Honda also had the most average room for first- and second-row passengers. We liked the column-mounted shifter as it frees up welcome room in the center console. In addition, at 90.3 cubic feet, the Pilot's maximum cargo capacity was the largest by far. The Honda also got top marks for having the quietest interior with minimal road and engine noise.
Additionally, the Pilot took first place when it came to build quality. Interior and exterior seams were uniform. Construction seemed solid and durable. It also had none of the mystery buzzing and rattling that afflicted our other testers.
We did bemoan the blockish interior design with its vast, unbroken plains of monochromatic plastic. And some drivers found the audio controls far too busy and confusing to operate while driving.
The front and rear seats also drew some complaints. While they were wide and initially comfy, over time we found the front seats a little short under the thigh and a tad too hard. Similarly, the rear seats seemed roomy at first, but were ultimately deemed too firm. The third-row seats are exclusively for children, small children.
The Pilot proved to be the most comfortable of our crossover SUVs, as its soft suspension flattened out the rough spots. The automatic four-wheel-drive system is the same as is used in the
Acura MDX. Called Variable Torque Management Four-Wheel Drive (VTM-4), it directs power only to the front wheels during normal driving. When the system detects slippage, it can direct up to half of total torque to the rear wheels. If you are trapped in very slippery conditions, you can lock the power split at 50/50 for speeds up to 18 mph. Because it's electronic, the switch can occur before you even realize a wheel has lost traction.
There were times on the "beginner" trails at the Paragon Adventure Park when we only had a front and rear wheel on the ground, and the Honda never hesitated. However, when the trail got touchy, we had to be careful that the Pilot's considerable momentum didn't force us into directions we didn't want to go. Otherwise, the Pilot was solid and composed; and even on the bumpiest surfaces, it kept everyone inside firmly in their seats.
Although it failed to grab top honors, the Pilot was still an impressive crossover SUV. We think it's a solid, wise choice for anyone with a lot of kids and gear to move around at a good price. But for those looking for all that and a little fun behind the wheel, the Pilot comes up short.
Second Opinions: Road Test Editor John DiPietro says: The Honda was my fave. Why? It felt solid as a rock, was powerful, had the most seating and towing capacity and came with a ton of standard luxury and convenience features, such as a DVD system and that fold-flat third-row seat.
Some of my colleagues thought the Pilot felt big compared to the others, but it didn't strike me that way, as I found it easy to handle and park. And just like Honda versus Toyota cars, the Pilot gives more feedback to the driver, while the Highlander delivers a more isolated ride. I liked the reassuring weight in the Pilot's steering and was also impressed by the five-speed automatic that did a great job of picking the right gear for hills and holding it.
In terms of style, the Pilot may not be as exciting as the Mitsu or Nissan, but it looks more like an SUV than the tall-wagonlike Toyota. With all of these loaded SUVs' as-tested prices hovering around the $32,000 mark, the Honda's greater working abilities, commendable fuel efficiency, generous list of features and well-rounded driving dynamics make it the winner in my book.
Road Test Editor Brian Moody says: I thought the Pilot was a dead ringer to win this comparison test from the day I heard which vehicles would be involved. Although I like the Pilot quite a bit, when driving it back-to-back with the other vehicles in its class I was surprised by how big, heavy and numb it felt on the road. It's clearly the biggest of the bunch, and it offers the much desired third-row seat, but its size seems to result in clumsy handling. That really turned me off.
I was also expecting more comfort from the front seats; they're kinda hard if you ask me. Inside, the Pilot is filled with the typical (for Honda) quality materials, but it doesn't do much for me from a design perspective. Even the Highlander and its funky slate-gray trimmed dash had more pizzazz than the Pilot.
I love the Pilot's open highway manners smooth and quiet. Other than that, I don't feel like I have much to say good or bad, the Pilot just is. Certainly, no one who buys a Pilot will be disappointed; in fact, if you need the extra space, there are few choices as good as the Honda. Still, I can't help but feel rather "blah" about this car nothing about it excites.
Add A Comment »
razzvan1976 says:
10:08 AM, 12/03/2009
the nissan murano looks good , but has poor interior workmanship.