Honda Pilot vs Toyota 4Runner vs VS Toureg

Status
Not open for further replies.
We have a 2005 Acura MDX, which is very similar to a Pilot. It's been in our family since new, and with over 100,000 miles on it now, it's been an excellent family companion.

You can see the 100,000 mile report I wrote, including history of all repairs, here:

http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=3199384

I've done a number of things to it since we got it, but that's just because that's what I like to do. Things like brakes and tires. I didn't include fluid changes on there only because the list would grow quite long.

The Honda V-6 engine is a peach. The transmission in ours is still rock solid, and I expect it to remain so for another 100,000 miles. All suspension pieces are original, all exhaust pieces are original, all interior bits are original. The car has worn VERY well. The material quality is very good...and I'm not talking just about the leather bits or door cards. I'm talking about the quality of the hard parts. Bushings are durable, sensors are durable, electrical connectors are durable. All of the vacuum lines under the hood are silicone instead of rubber, so they all look like brand new.

Another thing about it that I really appreciate is how easy it is to maintain. The engine and transmission fluid sumps have dipsticks, so you can check them AND so that you can service them. The transfer case has a very easy-to-get-to drain and fill plug. The VTM-4 unit in the back has a very easy-to-get-to drain and fill plug. The VTM-4 unit is also very durable; you never hear of failures with these things. It's a pretty cool electro-mechanical differential that you can manually lock on the dashboard, or let it manage itself. It's not intended for rock-crawling, and it doesn't have a low range. It's intended for driving through slush and snow and it works incredibly well for that. Pair it with good tires and it's very sure-footed.

If our MDX fell off the face of the earth tomorrow, we would be in your shoes, and would likely replace it with a Pilot. It also has a very useful third row. Adults are a very tight squeeze, but it works great for kids, and we use ours regularly, which was a big factor in letting us get rid of our minivan to buy this. This drives a ton better than our minivan did, and it's as versatile as well. Its go-in-all-weather capabilities far surpass our minivan, so that's a win. Obvious compromise is fuel economy, but we glady make the trade.

We like our Acura so much, we bought a CR-V to compliment it almost three years ago, replacing a string of two Toyotas I owned. It's my daily driver and is I think the best car I've ever owned. The Toyotas were fine, but their car chassis are getting more difficult to maintain (with their "sealed" transmissions and other issues), and they aren't as engaging to drive, which was important to me.
 
Originally Posted By: Hokiefyd
We have a 2005 Acura MDX, which is very similar to a Pilot.

The Honda V-6 engine is a peach.

It is worth noting that your engine is pre-VCM and that current Pilots are stuck with it.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Indydriver
Originally Posted By: Hokiefyd
We have a 2005 Acura MDX, which is very similar to a Pilot.

The Honda V-6 engine is a peach.

It is worth noting that your engine is pre-VCM and that current Pilots are stuck with it.


True. But as noted in previous threads, the "VCM issue" tends to inflict a subset of owners who use the cheapest oil at the longest intervals, and this probably doesn't apply to most folks on BITOG looking to advice. I know as many as four or five people (not counting BITOGer friends like you) who own VCM-equipped Hondas and everything's peachy-keen. And they're not necessarily gear-heads either, so they are probably the ones using the cheapest oil at the longest intervals.
 
Originally Posted By: Hokiefyd
Originally Posted By: Indydriver
Originally Posted By: Hokiefyd
We have a 2005 Acura MDX, which is very similar to a Pilot.

The Honda V-6 engine is a peach.

It is worth noting that your engine is pre-VCM and that current Pilots are stuck with it.


True. But as noted in previous threads, the "VCM issue" tends to inflict a subset of owners who use the cheapest oil at the longest intervals, and this probably doesn't apply to most folks on BITOG looking to advice. I know as many as four or five people (not counting BITOGer friends like you) who own VCM-equipped Hondas and everything's peachy-keen. And they're not necessarily gear-heads either, so they are probably the ones using the cheapest oil at the longest intervals.


If poor oil selection and not following the maintenance schedule are what plagues the Honda engine, I will take that with a grain of salt because I take good care of my vehicles. I have saying, "Take good care of your car, otherwise it will take care of you...." Only once this saying failed me and ironically it was with my present Toyota. The 4WD computer failed while driving bring the car to a halt because the anti-lock breaks engage past 15 MPH. Yes it created a dangerous situation on the road going from 40mph to 15mph in seconds without driver control. This happened exactly 8 months past warranty expiration at 32,000 miles - $550 to replace.
 
Originally Posted By: Hokiefyd
Originally Posted By: Indydriver
Originally Posted By: Hokiefyd
We have a 2005 Acura MDX, which is very similar to a Pilot.

The Honda V-6 engine is a peach.

It is worth noting that your engine is pre-VCM and that current Pilots are stuck with it.


True. But as noted in previous threads, the "VCM issue" tends to inflict a subset of owners who use the cheapest oil at the longest intervals, and this probably doesn't apply to most folks on BITOG looking to advice. I know as many as four or five people (not counting BITOGer friends like you) who own VCM-equipped Hondas and everything's peachy-keen. And they're not necessarily gear-heads either, so they are probably the ones using the cheapest oil at the longest intervals.

Not to hijack the thread because I've discussed the VCM issue in depth elsewhere, Honda's problems are definitely not related to "the cheapest oil at the longest intervals". Most of the victims don't do their own maintenance, they go to the dealer for service when Honda's MM tells them too. They have faithfully followed manufacturer specifications. The problem's initial symptom is oil consumption. Those not checking oil levels and topping off between dealer service are showing up for their oil changes with precious little oil in the sump. Some have seized altogether. These engines become oil starved because it's all going out the tailpipe.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Indydriver
Originally Posted By: Hokiefyd
Originally Posted By: Indydriver
Originally Posted By: Hokiefyd
We have a 2005 Acura MDX, which is very similar to a Pilot.

The Honda V-6 engine is a peach.

It is worth noting that your engine is pre-VCM and that current Pilots are stuck with it.


True. But as noted in previous threads, the "VCM issue" tends to inflict a subset of owners who use the cheapest oil at the longest intervals, and this probably doesn't apply to most folks on BITOG looking to advice. I know as many as four or five people (not counting BITOGer friends like you) who own VCM-equipped Hondas and everything's peachy-keen. And they're not necessarily gear-heads either, so they are probably the ones using the cheapest oil at the longest intervals.

Not to hijack the thread because I've discussed the VCM issue in depth elsewhere, Honda's problems are definitely not related to "the cheapest oil at the longest intervals". Most of the victims don't do their own maintenance, they go to the dealer for service when Honda's MM tells them too. They have faithfully followed manufacturer specifications. The problem's initial symptom is oil consumption. Those not checking oil levels and topping off between dealer service are showing up for their oil changes with precious little oil in the sump. Some have seized altogether. These engines become oil starved because it's all going out the tailpipe.


So my take away is if I go Honda, make sure I have oil stocked in my garage and check once a month...... Joy.
 
Originally Posted By: Indydriver
Most of the victims don't do their own maintenance, they go to the dealer for service when Honda's MM tells them too. They have faithfully followed manufacturer specifications.


You are exactly right! They follow the MM intervals on dealer-supplied bulk conventional 5W-20 oil, which is pushing inexpensive oil for far too long in this particular engine. In my opinion, Honda has a history of pushing the limits of fluids too far, and in multiple areas. I believe this is true with the VCM engines and I believe this is true with ATF. I think that if Honda moved to reprogram the MM intervals to something like 5,000 miles, this problem would largely be eliminated.

Again, a non-issue for me. I would use synthetic oil and I'd change it at 5,000 mile intervals. I'd then report back in 200,000 miles to let the group know how well the engine was doing.
smile.gif
 
Why not consider a domestic like the Equinox AWD? My wife has one (FWD) and it has been flawless in the past 2 years. GM drivetrains are dependable and last a long time.
 
Since it's the car for his wife, and snow is the primary traction concern, I would suggest the honda pilot for safety reasons/snow handling dynamics. It's a FWD vehicle with RWD traction aids, inherently safer for someone who is not a RWD fanatic.

the RWD 4runner, while better if towing large loads, is a RWD platform that will be more susceptible to oversteer in the white stuff. I'm not familiar with either, and maybe if the 4R has some sort of "auto" mode it would be effective enough, but I don't see, for her purposes, an advantage to it.

We have an MDX, an 02, on its original trans. I've had it in the snow exactly once, down here in southeast, but have plenty of snow experience from elsewhere. It gets good grades in snow-- I put it through the wringer b/c I was curious. 110,000 miles and counting with no issues besides a faulty blower in the rear a/c.
 
Do not get the vw- everyone I know hates it- plus the reason it does so well in snow is because it is a heavy beast. Electrical gremlins, problems with drive train. A friend of mine has had to replace the all kinds of things- and not even at 100k. Thousands of dollars spent on fixing stuff. Other friends have complained about expensive repair costs and electrical gremlins.

Get better tires- if you are so concerned with snow traction- get a set of snow tires. With snow tires, I pass suvs and trucks on hills every winter. Also- I stop really well with snow tires.
 
Originally Posted By: Silverado12
Why not consider a domestic like the Equinox AWD? My wife has one (FWD) and it has been flawless in the past 2 years. GM drivetrains are dependable and last a long time.


The GMC Acaida test drove nice but the spouse took one look at the rear seat floor rails and said no - grime, food, etc.. will collect in the rails despite weekly cleanings. For those who are not aware, GMC has the rear seat floor rails fully open and exposed. Personally I like the Dodge Durango and it has the 8-speed Audi/BMW transmission but again, the spouse said no due to aesthetics. So I'm back to the 3 vehicles in question. Others were looked at as well and they to did not make the cut. If I could afford the Audi Q7 I would but I can't. I personally drive the Q5 with OEM sneakers and have no issues with traction. The Q5 has already been driven in 2 snow storms including an ice storm with zero issues. The Highlander in the exact same storms/conditions completely whipped out on the road (again) this year. It has come to the point where we swap cars and nobody else is allowed to get into the Toyota but me. Is my spouse trying to tell me something? Even when I drive the Toyota Highlander, it does struggle quite a bit with traction and left me walking home once to get my Audi at the time to tow it home. For those who did not read the earlier threads, yes my Audi sedan fitted with Michelin Energy tires pulled a stuck Highlander with Michelin CrossTerrain tires because it was stuck in the same dept 4 feet snow.

I would consider a Subaru but the Forester is way too small - heck the Audi Q5 is to small! (yes the Toureg is larger but not significantly which is a concern). Let's put it this way, this is an outdoor and ice hockey family. For those who understand.....enough said.

The 4Runner is a completely different system that some have posted great results - why I am considering it.
 
For those posts that keep saying snow tires and only snow tires....

The Highlander is presently fitted with these tires:
http://www.tirerack.com/tires/tires.jsp?tireMake=Yokohama&tireModel=Geolandar+H%2FT-S+G051&partnum=27SR6GEOHTSOWL&vehicleSearch=true&fromCompare1=yes&autoMake=Toyota&autoYear=2004&autoModel=Highlander%204wd&autoModClar=

and they have decent snow rating yet the vehicle can not grip the road.

And an Audi A6 sedan fitted with: http://www.tirerack.com/tires/tires.jsp?...mp;autoModClar=

has picked up the stranded family more than once in the same road conditions. Please stop mentioning snow tires because that is only one piece of the equation and not THE equation.

---and this example has been repeated 3 times with 3 different VW/Audi vehicles compared to the same Highlander fitted with 3 different types of tires.

Thank you.
 
Last edited:
I LOVE our '97 4Runner but if it's winter traction you're concerned about I would go with the Pilot since I got a chance to play around in the snow with a Ridgeline that shares the same VTM-4 AWD system, and it was planted. The 4Runner would be too much vehicle for your stated needs. It will ride harsher; be noisier; get poorer gas mileage. If you stated you wanted a true SUV(true truck frame and not based off a sedan frame) because you enjoy the outdoors, offroading, and you will need to tow something more than 1,000 lbs, I would say go with the 4Runner.

You are from NJ(I spent 40 years of my life there)and you are complaining about the poor winter traction of your Highlander(don't take it personal).......................while this Canuck would beg to differ.
 
Of the 3 vehicles that you mention, I would disregard the VW. My choice would be the Pilot because of the full time 4WD system and because it drives/handles more like a car. It has a useable 3rd row seat. But, the well-known engine problems and higher maintenance would bother me. The 4Runner is the best of the 3 vehicles when it comes to reliability/durability/longevity, but it is a truck with a truck type 4WD system, and it drives/handles like a truck. Also, the 3rd row seat is all but unusable by anyone but little kids and it doesn't have rear A/C.
Personally, I wouldn't buy any of the 3 vehicles that you mentioned. IMO the new Highlander is the best vehicle in this class. My second choice would be the new Pathfinder. Honorable mention goes to the new Ford Explorer.
Stay away from the biggest tires on any of these vehicles (19" and 20"). They will have problems in the snow.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: GenSan
You are from NJ(I spent 40 years of my life there)and you are complaining about the poor winter traction of your Highlander(don't take it personal).......................while this Canuck would beg to differ.


It snows in Syracuse and depending where in NJ, you just get a light dusting. Yup, I hear you loud and clear..... I spend my time in PA, NY, and CT.
 
I would get the Toyota based on the work I have to do on such cars.

Tires mean more than anything when determining how well a vehicle drives on snow. Many factory tires are made cheaply, and that is why they don't grip in snow. When I worked at tires plus, guys who drove in snow would get Bridgestone Dueler AT REVO tires, and never need any snow tires. I know of no truck that left the factory with them, only trucks that came with lower grades of Bridgestone AT tires.
 
Quote:
My current 2004 Toyota Highlander 4WD is fast approaching time to replace due to excessive maintenance costs (~$4,000 in last 8 months with 100,000 miles).
Since nobody said it, I will say. Because you have already spent that money, it makes most sense to keep the vehicle. In general, that vehicle is NOT known to be a money pit. If you are doing it to "save" money in excessive maintenance by getting rid of this vehicle, unfortunately, that just does work.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Vikas
Since nobody said it, I will say. Because you have already spent that money, it makes most sense to keep the vehicle.


Agree 100%

I also guess that those $4k in repairs were done at a dealership and not an indy or attempted diagnose-DIY. If that's the case, I guess it can get expensive to own a vehicle out of warranty for some people.
 
Most true..yes, the dealership performs the 'advanced jobs'. I only perform basic maintenance myself (oil, tire rotations, etc...) The only large job I completed this month to save myself a $1,100 dealership bill was replacing the heat/air control knob wire. Had a fun time dismantling my center console, but this posting I found on the internet was 100% spot on:

http://www.devalcourt.com/2010/03/fixing-2004-toyota-highlander-ac-and-heat-issue/

Interesting how the dealership charges $1,100 for a job that cost me $20 in parts at Radio Shack.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top