Sign in to follow this  
Nailing Malarkey Too

F35 exceeding expectations. Israel .. "Intel Goldmine"

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, mikewof said:

48 hours. In the software development game that might as well be 48 years.

You make no sense. It was a fuel line problem, not software. 

As for the "the enemy is creating a workaround to obsolete the fat, expensive beasts."? Of course, they are. The F35 obsoletes everything they have in the field so what would you expect them to do. Give up and disband their military?

If the enemy builds a better whatever you seek to build a better counter-whatever. 

Sometimes the countermeasure will come quickly and sometimes it never comes. The Russians tried hundreds of times to down the SR71; some say more than a thousand missiles fired over 50 years and no hits. 

It will take the Russians and Chinese decades to invent,  engineer, test and deploy a counter to the F35 and it will be very costly for them to replace all the systems in their arsenal. Meanwhile, the Gen 6 Fighter will be ready to fly.

You fail to acknowledge that stealth is a combination of passive and active countermeasures along with tactical measures. While advances in passive measures are somewhat limited by the physical geometry of the airframe the same is not true of the active and tactical measures. Processors and signal algorithms will continue to improve unabated. As Russians find better ways to find and target we will find better ways to spoof and jam. The F35 is a leap ahead. putting our potential adversaries in a deep hole for the next couple of decades. Their problem is we won't be sitting on our hands in the meantime. 

The alternative is to fall behind and hope the East will be as nice to the West as we have been to them. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Caution or panic?

The U.S. military on Thursday grounded its entire fleet of F-35 stealth fighters after one of the jets crashed during a training mission in South Carolina last month, officials said Thursday. 

The stand down affects more than 200 jets while an "inspection of a fuel tube" in F-35 engines takes place, according to a Pentagon spokesman. 

“If suspect fuel tubes are installed, the part will be removed and replaced. If known good fuel tubes are already installed, then those aircraft will be returned to flight status. Inspections are expected to be completed within the next 24 to 48 hours,” Joe DellaVedova, a spokesman for the F-35 program, said in a statement to Fox News. 

The inspections come in the wake of an F-35B jet crash outside of Beaufort, S.C. on Sept. 28. 

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/entire-f-35-stealth-fighter-jet-fleet-grounded-by-military-after-crash-in-september/ar-BBOeOlb?li=BBnb7K

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Number one two years in a row. 

image.thumb.png.3b3d960ef8f3d9fb56395dabfb2222b0.png

We heard plenty of disagreement about our naming the Honda Ridgeline to our 10Best Trucks and SUVs list last year, with most grousing centered around claims that it isn’t a “real” truck. We hate to play the dictionary card here, but, like it or not, the Ridgeline is by definition a pickup truck. And we’ve driven and tested the entirety of the mid-size-truck segment, filled each one with our volume-measuring ping-pong balls and carry-on cases, evaluated the trucks’ real-world fuel economy, towed with them, and even taken them tailgating. The Honda Ridgeline is simply the best of them all.

A mid-size pickup doesn’t need to tow or haul as much as a full-size brute. We reason that the vast majority of buyers in this segment view their truck as more of a multitool, offering levels of convenience, wieldiness, and daily comfort absent from larger pickups while still having reasonable towing and hauling capabilities. Those who actually need full-size capability have a full set of options just one rung up—including the also excellent and also 10Best award–winning Ford F-150.

The Ridgeline’s 5000-pound maximum towing capacity and 1580-pound payload rating are good enough for an expensive trip to a home-supply store or for lugging a decent-size boat to the lake, and the Honda has the best balance of practicality and everyday usability even if it doesn’t out-tow the diesel-powered GMC Canyon or conquer off-road trails as well as the Toyota Tacoma TRD Pro or the Chevrolet Colorado ZR2. The Ridgeline’s smooth and gutsy 3.5-liter V-6 makes quick work of highway passing, plus it sips fuel at a surprisingly low rate, returning an impressive 28 mpg on our 75-mph real-world highway fuel-economy test—matching that of the GMC’s diesel engine but while burning cheaper and less energy-dense fuel.

Want to talk about cargo? The Ridgeline held 18 carry-on cases inside its rear cabin and 511 ping-pong balls throughout its various front-seat cubbies, both tops by large margins over any of its competition. And then there’s that huge, lockable, and watertight storage compartment underneath the 5.3-foot bed, a well that also features a drain plug, making it a perfect, albeit uninsulated, cooler for beverages and food when tailgating. Count us as huge fans of the dual-hinged tailgate, too, which just might be the Ridgeline’s most convenient feature.

These conveniences alone don’t earn the Honda its 10Best award. Against the competition, it also has the most spacious rear seat, the quietest cabin, superior outward visibility, a far more comfortable ride, and more agile handling. The Ridgeline is a capable family vehicle that also happens to have an open bed out back; in our offices, we’re all in agreement that it’s the best mid-size truck on the market. —Drew Dorian

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

part of the F3something  investigation will boil down to the question if there was a chirping sound or not ...goh, this guy is so gullible, it's just too easy snip2.thumb.PNG.e7a41714b2c87feeb9699469c0ef71ec.PNG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Nailing Malarkey Too said:

He says with glee.  

It is very common when an incident occurs and a cause is determined for the fleet to stand down for inspection or remediation. But you keep babbling the jingoistic pablum of the left "Most expensive" blah blah blah

Throughout the life of every plane, issues will be discovered, some will be design flaws, some age-related, mantena\ce issues and a host of other reason. Civilian aircraft have similar events. For Example:

  • FAA Airworthiness Directives (AD)
  • FAA Special Airworthiness Information Bulletins (SAIB)
  • FAA Service Difficulty Reports (SDR)
  • FAA Unapproved Parts Notifications (UPN)

I can't think of any fighter that has not been grounded a few time in its development and service life. It is routine. 

  • Air Force grounds 2-seater F-16 fighters after cracks found 2014

  • Air Force grounded dozens of A-10s in November after hypoxia incidents 2018

  • The Air Force has grounded its entire fleet of F-15s, the service's premier fighter aircraft, after one of the planes disintegrated over eastern Missouri during a training mission, raising the possibility of a fatal flaw in the aging fighters' fuselage that could keep it out of the skies for months. 2007

  • All U.S. F/A-18 Hornet models affected by oxygen deprivation and cabin decompression issues  2017

 

Typhoons are still flying.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've got 512 ping-pong balls I need to move. Can anyone recommend a truck for that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Ease the sheet. said:

Typhoons are still flying.

Barely.

And today so are most F35's

DAS KAMPFFLUGZEUG WIRD GEBROCHEN —

Germany’s Typhoon problem: Only four fighters can be made combat ready

Video: Most of Germany's fighter jets (and tanks and ships and helicopters) are broken.

SEAN GALLAGHER - 5/15/2018, 8:44 AM

If you thought the US Department of Defense's procurement adventures with the F-35 and other big-budget weapons systems are bad, you might want to check out what's going on in Europe, where defense procurement battles have left most of the German Luftwaffe grounded for lack of parts.

Last week, at the annual Charlemagne Prize ceremony in Aachen, Germany—in which French President Emmanuel Macron was recognized for his efforts on behalf of European unity—German Prime Minister Angela Merkel pronounced that Europe could no longer depend on the United States for its protection. "Europe has to take its destiny into its own hands," Merkel said. "That is the task of the future."

Merkel has given this message before. But if Europe is to take its destiny into its own hands any time soon, Germany has a lot of work to do—the Bundeswehr, Germany's defense ministry, is suffering from multiple readiness crises in a culmination of years of cost-shaving and poor management decisions. And the latest symptom to emerge of that crisis is the dwindling number of actually functional fighter jets that the Luftwaffe, Germany's air force, can actually call combat ready. For the Eurofighter Typhoon, Germany's main fighter aircraft, that number is four—out of a total of 128.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Eurofighter Typhoon: It's EVEN WORSE than we thought

RAF gets just 107 jets – and new budget trainwreck looms

By Lewis Page 3 Mar 2011 at 11:13

Analysis Yesterday the UK National Audit Office published a detailed report on the current status of the infamous Eurofighter combat jet – nowadays officially known as Typhoon. We here on the Reg defense desk have always had a low opinion of the cripplingly expensive, marginally useful fighter: but even we were amazed by the new facts and figures. The Eurofighter, almost unbelievably, is turning out to be even worse value for money than we had thought.n.

Probably the most dismal figure we are given is that the RAF will actually put into service just 107 Typhoons. At the moment it has received 70: the last of the 160 planes ordered by the UK will be delivered in 2015. But, we are told, "by 2019" all the Tranche 1 jets (which were still being delivered to the RAF at the start of 2008) will be "retired" – that is, thrown away. We'll pay for 160 jets (actually we'll pay for 2321), but we'll only ever get a fleet of 107.

This shows the acquisition cost of the Eurofighter/Typhoon in an even worse light than it had previously appeared when an RAF fleet of 160 had been expected. It is now acknowledged that the development and production cost to the UK of Eurofighter will be £23bn with planned upgrades.

This means that we UK taxpayers will have shelled out no less than £215m for each of our 107 jets – that's $350m at today's rates, rather more than the US taxpayers have been made to pay for each of their 185 Raptor superfighters2, almost all of which will be used operationally. And the Raptor has third-generation Stealth: the Eurofighter has no stealth features at all. The Raptor has thrust vectoring for unbeatable maneuverability in a dogfight: the Eurofighter doesn't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/7/2018 at 2:38 PM, Nailing Malarkey Too said:

"Israel Air Force chief Maj.-Gen. (res.) Amir Eshel has called the F-35 “game changing,” saying that Israel gathered new intelligence during a single flight by the F-35 earlier this year that other reconnaissance and intelligence gathering systems would take weeks to gather."

The DAS system, synthetic aperture radar ground mapping, IR systems. radio and wide band radar receivers make the F35 an unmatched intel vacuum that eclipses traditional systems with its stealth. 

There are strong hints from Israel that their F35's have overflown Iranian nuclear installations undetected by Iran's new Russian S300 systems.  The same is apparently true of Israeli actions in Syria which is defended by by even newer S400 systems. 

 

The Russian S500 system makes the F35 an obsolete piece of junk.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, Nailing Malarkey Too said:

Only four fighters can be made combat ready

GWrO.gif

last I heard all F35s were broken!  Sitting on the ground too scared to fucking fly!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Nailing Malarkey Too said:

Number one two years in a row. 

image.thumb.png.3b3d960ef8f3d9fb56395dabfb2222b0.png

We heard plenty of disagreement about our naming the Honda Ridgeline to our 10Best Trucks and SUVs list last year, with most grousing centered around claims that it isn’t a “real” truck. We hate to play the dictionary card here, but, like it or not, the Ridgeline is by definition a pickup truck. And we’ve driven and tested the entirety of the mid-size-truck segment, filled each one with our volume-measuring ping-pong balls and carry-on cases, evaluated the trucks’ real-world fuel economy, towed with them, and even taken them tailgating. The Honda Ridgeline is simply the best of them all.

A mid-size pickup doesn’t need to tow or haul as much as a full-size brute. We reason that the vast majority of buyers in this segment view their truck as more of a multitool, offering levels of convenience, wieldiness, and daily comfort absent from larger pickups while still having reasonable towing and hauling capabilities. Those who actually need full-size capability have a full set of options just one rung up—including the also excellent and also 10Best award–winning Ford F-150.

The Ridgeline’s 5000-pound maximum towing capacity and 1580-pound payload rating are good enough for an expensive trip to a home-supply store or for lugging a decent-size boat to the lake, and the Honda has the best balance of practicality and everyday usability even if it doesn’t out-tow the diesel-powered GMC Canyon or conquer off-road trails as well as the Toyota Tacoma TRD Pro or the Chevrolet Colorado ZR2. The Ridgeline’s smooth and gutsy 3.5-liter V-6 makes quick work of highway passing, plus it sips fuel at a surprisingly low rate, returning an impressive 28 mpg on our 75-mph real-world highway fuel-economy test—matching that of the GMC’s diesel engine but while burning cheaper and less energy-dense fuel.

Want to talk about cargo? The Ridgeline held 18 carry-on cases inside its rear cabin and 511 ping-pong balls throughout its various front-seat cubbies, both tops by large margins over any of its competition. And then there’s that huge, lockable, and watertight storage compartment underneath the 5.3-foot bed, a well that also features a drain plug, making it a perfect, albeit uninsulated, cooler for beverages and food when tailgating. Count us as huge fans of the dual-hinged tailgate, too, which just might be the Ridgeline’s most convenient feature.

These conveniences alone don’t earn the Honda its 10Best award. Against the competition, it also has the most spacious rear seat, the quietest cabin, superior outward visibility, a far more comfortable ride, and more agile handling. The Ridgeline is a capable family vehicle that also happens to have an open bed out back; in our offices, we’re all in agreement that it’s the best mid-size truck on the market. —Drew Dorian

Honda Pilot with a bed.

I guess it's a good vehicle for soccer dads.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Safer than an F 35.

US military plane Hercules C-130 Crashes

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, mikewof said:

Honda Pilot with a bed.

I guess it's a good vehicle for soccer dads.

A farm work truck. Hauls a bigger payload than any other midsize. 1550 lbs a 30 bag pallet of horse feed is no problem. Real workhorse.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Hard On The Wind said:

The Russian S500 system makes the F35 an obsolete piece of junk.

You might want a second opinion before buying a Russing boondoggle from this guy 

Related image

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Nailing Malarkey Too said:

A farm work truck. Hauls a bigger payload than any other midsize. 1550 lbs a 30 bag pallet of horse feed is no problem. Real workhorse.

I guess, yeah, the Ridge might be good for running bags of feed around for some horses, but I wouldn't consider it a work vehicle, with our without a bed.

Remember Jack, I own a Pilot, I know what the unibody and the drivetrain can do. I've burned through three alternators since I've owned it because the engine tends to run so hot that it fries the electronics of anything lbolted too close to the block. It has a tow rating of 5k lbs., but I did that once, and I could feel the transmission struggling and the unibody torque. That exact same trailer then hitched onto my body-on-frame Isuzu truck, also with a V6, but even smaller than the Pilot/Ridge (3.2 L vs. 3.5 L) had no problems with that load. I have run that Isuzu over some rough off-road comditions and it shrugs it off. The Pilot is more of an on-road vehicle. It has a nice, smooth ride, my wife loves it, but it's not built for anything rougher than say an occasional groomed dirt road. And there is no way in hell that I would put the kind of loads that I put into my Dodge truck into that Pilot, the suspension would bottom out on the first speed table.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After sushi today, I had a look at two of the new Ridgelines in the car lot across the street. They're actually pretty nice trucklets. I wouldn't call them work trucks, or utility trucks, but they seem to have some advantages ... the floor height seems pretty low, at least compared to my truck. My elderly mom and dad would have an easy time getting in there. that cooler area under the bed seems pretty good. It looks comfortable inside.

I think that it's really a pretty well done vehicle for people who only occasionally need a truck bed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
Lockheed Martin F-35A Lightning II
Eurofighter Typhoon F1
Crew
1
1
 
 
Production
231 units [Diff.-269]
500 units [Diff.+269]
 
Length
50.43 ft (15.37 m) [Diff.-1.94 ft]
52.36 ft (15.96 m) [Diff.+1.94 ft]
 
Width
34.94 ft (10.65 m) [Diff.-0.98 ft]
35.93 ft (10.95 m) [Diff.+0.98 ft]
 
Height
17.32 ft (5.28 m) [Diff.0.00 ft]
17.32 ft (5.28 m) [Diff.0.00 ft]
 
Empty Wt.
29,002 lb (13,155 kg) [Diff.+4,751 lb]
24,251 lb (11,000 kg) [Diff.-4,751 lb]
 
MTOW
70,107 lb (31,800 kg) [Diff.+18,298 lb]
51,809 lb (23,500 kg) [Diff.-18,298 lb]
 
Power
1 x Pratt & Whitney F135 F119-PW-100 turbofan developing 40,000 lb thrust with afterburner with General Electric GE F120 alternate core engine.
2 x Eurojet EJ200 afterburning turbofans developing 20,250 lb of thrust each.
 
Speed
1,199 mph (1,930 kph) [Diff.-351 mph]
1,550 mph (2,495 kph) [Diff.+351 mph]
 
Range
1,379 miles (2,220 km) [Diff.-423 miles]
1,802 miles (2,900 km) [Diff.+423 miles]
 
Ceiling
50,000 ft (15,240 m) [Diff.-14,993 feet]
64,993 ft (19,810 m) [Diff.+14,993 feet]
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, mikewof said:

After sushi today, I had a look at two of the new Ridgelines in the car lot across the street. They're actually pretty nice trucklets. I wouldn't call them work trucks, or utility trucks, but they seem to have some advantages ... the floor height seems pretty low, at least compared to my truck. My elderly mom and dad would have an easy time getting in there. that cooler area under the bed seems pretty good. It looks comfortable inside.

I think that it's really a pretty well done vehicle for people who only occasionally need a truck bed.

Works well for those that need a truck bed most days. I'm adding a loft in the stables and a load of 24 5/8ths T&G subfloor panels fit perfectly. Can't do that in a Tacoma or a Colorado. Yeah, this guy is well past the 1500 lb load limit but even in the snow, it worked for him.

Any other midsize Pickup can't do that period.  Any Pickup that can't carry sheetrock flat in the back is a BS work truck. The only Trucky thing I can't do is rock crawling. Every day I say to myself, "Damn I could have been rock crawling right now." 

Someone should tell these guys it isn't a real work truck.

attachment.php?s=f8ee8b5c89d8a1c897eca0a22ff7d43c&attachmentid=283793&stc=1&d=1486393113

Related image

Related image

just look at this fool

Lawn Care Services

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
Lockheed Martin F-35A Lightning II
Sukhoi T-50 / PAK FA
Crew
1
1
 
Production
231 units [Diff.+222]
9 units [Diff.-222]
 
Length
50.43 ft (15.37 m) [Diff.-21.75 ft]
72.18 ft (22.00 m) [Diff.+21.75 ft]
 
Width
34.94 ft (10.65 m) [Diff.-11.65 ft]
46.59 ft (14.20 m) [Diff.+11.65 ft]
 
Height
17.32 ft (5.28 m) [Diff.-2.53 ft]
19.85 ft (6.05 m) [Diff.+2.53 ft]
 
Empty Wt.
29,002 lb (13,155 kg) [Diff.-11,784 lb]
40,786 lb (18,500 kg) [Diff.+11,784 lb]
 
MTOW
70,107 lb (31,800 kg) [Diff.-11,464 lb]
81,571 lb (37,000 kg) [Diff.+11,464 lb]
 
Power
1 x Pratt & Whitney F135 F119-PW-100 turbofan developing 40,000 lb thrust with afterburner with General Electric GE F120 alternate core engine.
2 x NPO Saturn / FNPTS MMPP Salyut AL-41F1 turbofan engines developing 35,000 lb of thrust each (T-50 prototype).
 
Speed
1,199 mph (1,930 kph) [Diff.-416 mph]
1,616 mph (2,600 kph) [Diff.+416 mph]
 
Range
1,379 miles (2,220 km) [Diff.-1,727 miles]
3,107 miles (5,000 km) [Diff.+1,727 miles]
 
Ceiling
50,000 ft (15,240 m) [Diff.-15,617 feet]
65,617 ft (20,000 m) [Diff.+15,617 feet]
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Nailing Malarkey Too said:

Works well for those that need a truck bed most days. I'm adding a loft in the stables and a load of 24 5/8ths T&G subfloor panels fit perfectly. Can't do that in a Tacoma or a Colorado. Yeah, this guy is well past the 1500 lb load limit but even in the snow, it worked for him.

Any other midsize Pickup can't do that period.  Any Pickup that can't carry sheetrock flat in the back is a BS work truck. The only Trucky thing I can't do is rock crawling. Every day I say to myself, "Damn I could have been rock crawling right now." 

Someone should tell these guys it isn't a real work truck.

attachment.php?s=f8ee8b5c89d8a1c897eca0a22ff7d43c&attachmentid=283793&stc=1&d=1486393113

Related image

Related image

just look at this fool

Lawn Care Services

 

I am sure Happy Jack and Hillary are glad you are here to fight the good fight.

I wonder where they went?  Couldn't be that they were humiliated and skulked off, only to reappear with another ID, could it?

Nah.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
Lockheed Martin F-35A Lightning II
Saab JAS 39C Gripen (Griffin)
Crew
1
1
 
Production
231 units [Diff.-16]
247 units [Diff.+16]
 
Length
50.43 ft (15.37 m) [Diff.+4.17 ft]
46.26 ft (14.10 m) [Diff.-4.17 ft]
 
Width
34.94 ft (10.65 m) [Diff.+7.38 ft]
27.56 ft (8.40 m) [Diff.-7.38 ft]
 
Height
17.32 ft (5.28 m) [Diff.+2.56 ft]
14.76 ft (4.50 m) [Diff.-2.56 ft]
 
Empty Wt.
29,002 lb (13,155 kg) [Diff.+14,010 lb]
14,991 lb (6,800 kg) [Diff.-14,010 lb]
 
MTOW
70,107 lb (31,800 kg) [Diff.+39,242 lb]
30,865 lb (14,000 kg) [Diff.-39,242 lb]
 
Power
1 x Pratt & Whitney F135 F119-PW-100 turbofan developing 40,000 lb thrust with afterburner with General Electric GE F120 alternate core engine.
1 x Volvo Aero RM12 (General Electric F404) turbofan engine with afterburner developing 18,100 lb thrust.
 
Speed
1,199 mph (1,930 kph) [Diff.-171 mph]
1,370 mph (2,205 kph) [Diff.+171 mph]
 
Range
1,379 miles (2,220 km) [Diff.-609 miles]
1,988 miles (3,200 km) [Diff.+609 miles]
 
Ceiling
50,000 ft (15,240 m) [Diff.0 feet]
50,000 ft (15,240 m) [Diff.0 feet]
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, mikewof said:

After sushi today, I had a look at two of the new Ridgelines in the car lot across the street. They're actually pretty nice trucklets. I wouldn't call them work trucks, or utility trucks, but they seem to have some advantages ... the floor height seems pretty low, at least compared to my truck. My elderly mom and dad would have an easy time getting in there. that cooler area under the bed seems pretty good. It looks comfortable inside.

I think that it's really a pretty well done vehicle for people who only occasionally need a truck bed.

Good point. Jack is an elder after all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Nailing Malarkey Too said:

 "Damn I could have been rock crawling right now." 

You crawl back under one all the time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/11/2018 at 1:33 PM, Nailing Malarkey Too said:

Number one two years in a row. 

image.thumb.png.3b3d960ef8f3d9fb56395dabfb2222b0.png

We heard plenty of disagreement about our naming the Honda Ridgeline to our 10Best Trucks and SUVs list last year, with most grousing centered around claims that it isn’t a “real” truck. We hate to play the dictionary card here, but, like it or not, the Ridgeline is by definition a pickup truck. And we’ve driven and tested the entirety of the mid-size-truck segment, filled each one with our volume-measuring ping-pong balls and carry-on cases, evaluated the trucks’ real-world fuel economy, towed with them, and even taken them tailgating. The Honda Ridgeline is simply the best of them all.

A mid-size pickup doesn’t need to tow or haul as much as a full-size brute. We reason that the vast majority of buyers in this segment view their truck as more of a multitool, offering levels of convenience, wieldiness, and daily comfort absent from larger pickups while still having reasonable towing and hauling capabilities. Those who actually need full-size capability have a full set of options just one rung up—including the also excellent and also 10Best award–winning Ford F-150.

The Ridgeline’s 5000-pound maximum towing capacity and 1580-pound payload rating are good enough for an expensive trip to a home-supply store or for lugging a decent-size boat to the lake, and the Honda has the best balance of practicality and everyday usability even if it doesn’t out-tow the diesel-powered GMC Canyon or conquer off-road trails as well as the Toyota Tacoma TRD Pro or the Chevrolet Colorado ZR2. The Ridgeline’s smooth and gutsy 3.5-liter V-6 makes quick work of highway passing, plus it sips fuel at a surprisingly low rate, returning an impressive 28 mpg on our 75-mph real-world highway fuel-economy test—matching that of the GMC’s diesel engine but while burning cheaper and less energy-dense fuel.

Want to talk about cargo? The Ridgeline held 18 carry-on cases inside its rear cabin and 511 ping-pong balls throughout its various front-seat cubbies, both tops by large margins over any of its competition. And then there’s that huge, lockable, and watertight storage compartment underneath the 5.3-foot bed, a well that also features a drain plug, making it a perfect, albeit uninsulated, cooler for beverages and food when tailgating. Count us as huge fans of the dual-hinged tailgate, too, which just might be the Ridgeline’s most convenient feature.

These conveniences alone don’t earn the Honda its 10Best award. Against the competition, it also has the most spacious rear seat, the quietest cabin, superior outward visibility, a far more comfortable ride, and more agile handling. The Ridgeline is a capable family vehicle that also happens to have an open bed out back; in our offices, we’re all in agreement that it’s the best mid-size truck on the market. —Drew Dorian

And yet, you LIE about not being the person who used to post as Happy Jack.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, random said:
 
Lockheed Martin F-35A Lightning II
Saab JAS 39C Gripen (Griffin)
Crew
1
1
 
Production
231 units [Diff.-16]
247 units [Diff.+16]
 
Length
50.43 ft (15.37 m) [Diff.+4.17 ft]
46.26 ft (14.10 m) [Diff.-4.17 ft]
 
Width
34.94 ft (10.65 m) [Diff.+7.38 ft]
27.56 ft (8.40 m) [Diff.-7.38 ft]
 
Height
17.32 ft (5.28 m) [Diff.+2.56 ft]
14.76 ft (4.50 m) [Diff.-2.56 ft]
 
Empty Wt.
29,002 lb (13,155 kg) [Diff.+14,010 lb]
14,991 lb (6,800 kg) [Diff.-14,010 lb]
 
MTOW
70,107 lb (31,800 kg) [Diff.+39,242 lb]
30,865 lb (14,000 kg) [Diff.-39,242 lb]
 
Power
1 x Pratt & Whitney F135 F119-PW-100 turbofan developing 40,000 lb thrust with afterburner with General Electric GE F120 alternate core engine.
1 x Volvo Aero RM12 (General Electric F404) turbofan engine with afterburner developing 18,100 lb thrust.
 
Speed
1,199 mph (1,930 kph) [Diff.-171 mph]
1,370 mph (2,205 kph) [Diff.+171 mph]
 
Range
1,379 miles (2,220 km) [Diff.-609 miles]
1,988 miles (3,200 km) [Diff.+609 miles]
 
Ceiling
50,000 ft (15,240 m) [Diff.0 feet]
50,000 ft (15,240 m) [Diff.0 feet]
 

The F35 really is a bloated pig, ain’t it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

9 hours ago, Nailing Malarkey Too said:

Works well for those that need a truck bed most days. I'm adding a loft in the stables and a load of 24 5/8ths T&G subfloor panels fit perfectly. Can't do that in a Tacoma or a Colorado. Yeah, this guy is well past the 1500 lb load limit but even in the snow, it worked for him.

Any other midsize Pickup can't do that period.  Any Pickup that can't carry sheetrock flat in the back is a BS work truck. The only Trucky thing I can't do is rock crawling. Every day I say to myself, "Damn I could have been rock crawling right now." 

Someone should tell these guys it isn't a real work truck.

attachment.php?s=f8ee8b5c89d8a1c897eca0a22ff7d43c&attachmentid=283793&stc=1&d=1486393113

Related image

Related image

just look at this fool

Lawn Care Services

 

Those guys are really using those Honda Pilots. Leessee ... some sheetrock, some timber, some wood pellets and a lawn tractor. My old marina use to use a 3 cylinder Geo Tracker to move boats around the yard. I guess it sort of made that Tracker a work truck, since you can press pretty much any vehicle into various services. 

No big deal on the 4 x 8 sheets, most mid-sized and full-sized trucks will take them, you just slide the joist spacers into the cutouts in front of the wheel bump and they go on top. No need to get melodramatic about it.

Why is Regatta Dog's icon on that barn? And that dipshit in the top photo ... why didn't he flag that load? It's more out of the bed than in the bed, and not a flag in sight.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, random said:
 
Lockheed Martin F-35A Lightning II
Sukhoi T-50 / PAK FA
Crew
1
1
 
Production
231 units [Diff.+222]
9 units [Diff.-222]
 
Length
50.43 ft (15.37 m) [Diff.-21.75 ft]
72.18 ft (22.00 m) [Diff.+21.75 ft]
 
Width
34.94 ft (10.65 m) [Diff.-11.65 ft]
46.59 ft (14.20 m) [Diff.+11.65 ft]
 
Height
17.32 ft (5.28 m) [Diff.-2.53 ft]
19.85 ft (6.05 m) [Diff.+2.53 ft]
 
Empty Wt.
29,002 lb (13,155 kg) [Diff.-11,784 lb]
40,786 lb (18,500 kg) [Diff.+11,784 lb]
 
MTOW
70,107 lb (31,800 kg) [Diff.-11,464 lb]
81,571 lb (37,000 kg) [Diff.+11,464 lb]
 
Power
1 x Pratt & Whitney F135 F119-PW-100 turbofan developing 40,000 lb thrust with afterburner with General Electric GE F120 alternate core engine.
2 x NPO Saturn / FNPTS MMPP Salyut AL-41F1 turbofan engines developing 35,000 lb of thrust each (T-50 prototype).
 
Speed
1,199 mph (1,930 kph) [Diff.-416 mph]
1,616 mph (2,600 kph) [Diff.+416 mph]
 
Range
1,379 miles (2,220 km) [Diff.-1,727 miles]
3,107 miles (5,000 km) [Diff.+1,727 miles]
 
Ceiling
50,000 ft (15,240 m) [Diff.-15,617 feet]
65,617 ft (20,000 m) [Diff.+15,617 feet]
 

Seems like Mlkey likes helping Jack keep the discussion off topic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/13/2018 at 8:11 PM, Raz'r said:

The F35 really is a bloated pig, ain’t it?

The F35 is not an air superiority fighter. The gripen is a jet designed in 1979 and is classified as LIGHT multirole fighter, and is non-stealthy.  Personally I find the gripen a sweet little piece of tech, but the two aren't really comparable.  Horses for courses, much like the sailing world.  The gripen does not have a carrier capable variant.  Does not have short take off / vertical and ability.  Does not have modern avionics.  But it's cheap and does what it does pretty well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Grrr... said:

The F35 is not an air superiority fighter. The gripen is a jet designed in 1979 and is classified as LIGHT multirole fighter, and is non-stealthy.  Personally I find the gripen a sweet little piece of tech, but the two aren't really comparable.  Horses for courses, much like the sailing world.  The gripen does not have a carrier capable variant.  Does not have short take off / vertical and ability.  Does not have modern avionics.  But it's cheap and does what it does pretty well.

Yeah you are correct, from what I can determine the F35 is designed to take the drone operator out of the shipping container near Las Vegas and into the aircraft.

Clever those people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, random said:

Yeah you are correct, from what I can determine the F35 is designed to take the drone operator out of the shipping container near Las Vegas and into the aircraft.

Clever those people.

I'm not sure exactly what you mean by that, but the F35 does have an incredible set of avionics.  That is where a huge chunk of money is going in these planes.  In layman's terms, they want a plane you can barely see that can be "forward" in a fight.  Their radar is capable of tracking lots of targets, their communication system capable of networking all that data automatically back to base and to other fighters.  

It might be simplest to say that the airforce is creating a force in which every plane can see every threat all the time, and weapons can be fired from hundreds of miles away.  At the same time the enemy can see nothing because of countermeasures and stealth.  It's a dream they've been working on for a while.  Other countries - Japan, Israel, Russia (and maybe China) have been working on the same thing, but it's a big 'question' mark as to how anyone's system will actually work in combat.

Regarding your comment about the drone operator... not sure really what to make of that.  Drones are versatile, but when you suddenly lose communication drones become a lot less lethal where the F-35 can take care of itself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/15/2018 at 7:33 AM, Grrr... said:

The F35 is not an air superiority fighter. The gripen is a jet designed in 1979 and is classified as LIGHT multirole fighter, and is non-stealthy.  Personally I find the gripen a sweet little piece of tech, but the two aren't really comparable.  Horses for courses, much like the sailing world.  The gripen does not have a carrier capable variant.  Does not have short take off / vertical and ability.  Does not have modern avionics.  But it's cheap and does what it does pretty well.

The Gripen is light enough to land and take off from a regular road, which for most intentional customers is more valuable than being able to land on a carrier that they don't actually have.

And the operators of the Gripen know that they can be seen and fly accordingly. The operators of the F-35 think they cannot be seen, and fly accordingly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Grrr... said:

I'm not sure exactly what you mean by that, but the F35 does have an incredible set of avionics.  That is where a huge chunk of money is going in these planes.  In layman's terms, they want a plane you can barely see that can be "forward" in a fight.  Their radar is capable of tracking lots of targets, their communication system capable of networking all that data automatically back to base and to other fighters.  

It might be simplest to say that the airforce is creating a force in which every plane can see every threat all the time, and weapons can be fired from hundreds of miles away.  At the same time the enemy can see nothing because of countermeasures and stealth.  It's a dream they've been working on for a while.  Other countries - Japan, Israel, Russia (and maybe China) have been working on the same thing, but it's a big 'question' mark as to how anyone's system will actually work in combat.

Regarding your comment about the drone operator... not sure really what to make of that.  Drones are versatile, but when you suddenly lose communication drones become a lot less lethal where the F-35 can take care of itself.

Well, let me rephrase that.  The era of manned aircraft is over.  The only exception would be really simple versatile versions like the Gripen, so that when shit happens it still works, like when the leave blower won't start, you get a millet broom.  When the auto rife fails you get a bolt action.

As far as the stealth bit goes ... seriously, after more than a decade of development, do you think the Russians and Chinese really won't be able to detect an F35?

image.thumb.png.7c6261397465824ba55dc36f32dbfc5f.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe they have their own stealth aircraft- but no one knows about them...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/13/2018 at 10:52 PM, mikewof said:

 

Those guys are really using those Honda Pilots. Leessee ... some sheetrock, some timber, some wood pellets and a lawn tractor. My old marina use to use a 3 cylinder Geo Tracker to move boats around the yard. I guess it sort of made that Tracker a work truck, since you can press pretty much any vehicle into various services. 

No big deal on the 4 x 8 sheets, most mid-sized and full-sized trucks will take them, you just slide the joist spacers into the cutouts in front of the wheel bump and they go on top. No need to get melodramatic about it.

Why is Regatta Dog's icon on that barn? And that dipshit in the top photo ... why didn't he flag that load? It's more out of the bed than in the bed, and not a flag in sight.

4

No other midsize and carry the load in that first image. Here are some of the non-melodramatic solutions you mentioned

Image result for plywood rack for pickup

Image result for plywood rack for pickup

Article Image

Image result for ridgeline carrying sheetrock

Related image

 

And here is my melodramatic Rube Goldberg solution to this problem that vexes Ridgeline owners

 

Image result for ridgeline carrying plywood

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The F35 is the best fighter flying 

The Ridgeline is the best Midsize work Pickup on the road. 

  1. best payload capacity
  2. best payload versatility
  3. best ride
  4. best acceleration
  5. best gas mileage
  6. best handling
  7. most comfortable
  8. quietest
  9. best reliability
  10. best safety (only Top Safety Pick Rated Truck period)
    image.thumb.png.5de5dfb74c00daf748394bcc8eb14f35.png
    image.thumb.png.e0852ecd542b911a25a6e8103ac0520c.png
    image.thumb.png.72b6951c268dc99aa8bb8732dda7760c.png
  11. best Headlights (only pickup with good headlights period)
  12. Composite bed need no liner and won't rust dent or puncture
  13. Only  trunk
  14. Only dual action gate for ease of loading bed without having to reach across the tailgate
  15. Only in bed exterior audio system. No boombox needed on the job site
  16. just the best family and work midsize pickup you can buy. Period. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Nailing Malarkey Too said:

No other midsize and carry the load in that first image. Here are some of the non-melodramatic solutions you mentioned

Image result for plywood rack for pickup

Image result for plywood rack for pickup

Article Image

Image result for ridgeline carrying sheetrock

Related image

 

And here is my melodramatic Rube Goldberg solution to this problem that vexes Ridgeline owners

 

Image result for ridgeline carrying plywood

 

My truck came with the factory bedliner, it has cutouts for the joist blocks. It's nowhere near as complicated as those in the picture. I don't use them, I just slide the 4x8 sheets over the top of the wheel wells, but for those who give a crap, it's just three inserts. Not a big deal.

And in exchange, I get an actual body-on-frame truck with an actual truck transmission, and actual truck suspension. If being able to lay sheetrock down without some notch studs is a big deal, then I guess the PWAB (Pilot with a bed) is the right choice. But most of use just slide the sheets in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, mikewof said:

My truck came with the factory bedliner, it has cutouts for the joist blocks. It's nowhere near as complicated as those in the picture. I don't use them, I just slide the 4x8 sheets over the top of the wheel wells, but for those who give a crap, it's just three inserts. Not a big deal.

And in exchange, I get an actual body-on-frame truck with an actual truck transmission, and actual truck suspension. If being able to lay sheetrock down without some notch studs is a big deal, then I guess the PWAB (Pilot with a bed) is the right choice. But most of use just slide the sheets in.

And what does the family think when work is done and it's time to hook up the sailboat and head to the keys 600 miles away?  But they love the box on frame, actual truck suspension, seat comfort, noise level, and the smooth ride? 

I bet dollars to donuts you don't do anything with your truck that the Honda could not do. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pentagon hiding ‘life-threatening’ F-35 design flaws to meet deadline – watchdog

The US F-35 program is apparently still suffering from hundreds of major technical flaws and the military is trying to conceal their severity to avoid schedule delays and cost overruns, a watchdog said.

Officials overseeing the development of the F-35 fighter jets have apparently deliberately downplayed some critical deficiencies that can endanger lives of both pilots and troops on the ground, said the Project On Government Oversight (POGO), an independent watchdog. It obtained the Pentagon agency’s documents which show that there’s no justification or plans to fix the flaws still plaguing the $1.5 trillion program.

Instead of fixing them, the problems were just re-categorized. The Deficiency Review Board of the Joint Strike Fighter Program Office downgraded 19 Category I problems to a less serious Category II, without providing any plan to correct ten of those critical design flaws. Category I deficiencies “may cause death, severe injury, or severe occupational illness; may cause loss or major damage to a weapon system; critically restricts the combat readiness capabilities of the using organization; or result in a production line stoppage,” according to the US military documents.

Category II deficiencies “could impede or constrain successful mission accomplishment.” The categories are assigned to the deficiencies by the testing personnel, who identify them during the test and evaluation process. In many cases, however, the board acted on its own “with no apparent justification or evidence that the flaws were in fact not as serious as initially categorized,” POGO said.

The list of the most critical issues includes problems with an emergency alert system when pilots eject, damage to the plane caused by the tail hook on the Navy variant, or the lack of any means for a pilot to confirm a weapon’s target data before firing, which could lead to troops on the ground being hit by friendly fire.

The Pentagon’s attempts to paper over serious problems with the F-35 are apparently caused by its desire to avoid further delays in the aircraft development schedule, POGO said. The F-35, built by Lockheed Martin, was supposed to finish the 16-year development phase this year.

“They want to be able to go up to Capitol Hill and say, ‘Nope, we don’t have any more Category 1 deficiencies,’” Dan Grazier, a military fellow at POGO, told Washington Examiner, adding that the developers are “just three weeks away from” a major deadline for initial test and evaluation of the aircraft, which comes on September 15.

In June, the US congressional watchdog, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) also warned the Pentagon against moving to mass production of the planes until all technical issues are resolved.

The same report also found almost 1,000 various technical problems affecting the F-35 jets, including 111 designated as Category 1 flaws. The issues ranged from helmets that can hinder pilots’ vision to a stealth-coating that might “melt” during a flight at supersonic speed.

The fifth-generation stealth fighter built by Lockheed Martin was supposed to be a modular design, with modifications adapting it for service in the US Air Force (F-35A), the US Marine Corps (F-35B) and the US Navy (F-35C). However, the aircraft development repeatedly missed the deadlines and the cost of each individual fighter jet is now estimated to surpass $120 million.

The notorious jets have also repeatedly faced various technical issues while flying. Most recently, an F-35 plane had to perform an emergency landing after experiencing a technical malfunction over Floridian skies. When it already parked, the jet’s front nose gear collapsed, adding to the misery. In December 2017, a US Air Force F-35 fighter jet lost a panel during a “routine training mission” in Okinawa.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How does it do against WMD's?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Nailing Malarkey Too said:

And what does the family think when work is done and it's time to hook up the sailboat and head to the keys 600 miles away?  But they love the box on frame, actual truck suspension, seat comfort, noise level, and the smooth ride? 

I bet dollars to donuts you don't do anything with your truck that the Honda could not do. 

My son loves my dirty, squeaky, rough-riding truck.

My wife and daughters hate it. They much prefer to take the Pilot. I've no doubt that they would love the Ridgewood.

So you have a good point ... Maybe the Ridgeline Pilot is marketed and targeted for people who crave comfort (unibody), who prefer ease of entry (low floor) and who don't want a their trucklet to be too much like a truck. My old boss loved her Ridgeline, she used it for getting feed for her two show horses.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Nailing Malarkey Too said:

The F35 is the best fighter flying 

The Ridgeline is the best Midsize work Pickup on the road. 

  1. best payload capacity
  2. best payload versatility
  3. best ride
  4. best acceleration
  5. best gas mileage
  6. best handling
  7. most comfortable
  8. quietest
  9. best reliability
  10. best safety (only Top Safety Pick Rated Truck period)
    image.thumb.png.5de5dfb74c00daf748394bcc8eb14f35.png
    image.thumb.png.e0852ecd542b911a25a6e8103ac0520c.png
    image.thumb.png.72b6951c268dc99aa8bb8732dda7760c.png
  11. best Headlights (only pickup with good headlights period)
  12. Composite bed need no liner and won't rust dent or puncture
  13. Only  trunk
  14. Only dual action gate for ease of loading bed without having to reach across the tailgate
  15. Only in bed exterior audio system. No boombox needed on the job site
  16. just the best family and work midsize pickup you can buy. Period. 

So why lie? It's clear you are the same person that used to post as Happy Jack.

Oh, that's right, you lie. All the time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Nailing Malarkey Too said:

No other midsize and carry the load in that first image. Here are some of the non-melodramatic solutions you mentioned

Image result for plywood rack for pickup

Image result for plywood rack for pickup

Article Image

Image result for ridgeline carrying sheetrock

Related image

 

And here is my melodramatic Rube Goldberg solution to this problem that vexes Ridgeline owners

 

Image result for ridgeline carrying plywood

 

 

what an utter hunk of shite that thing is and having to build frames to haul materials proves it in spades

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, aA said:

what an utter hunk of shite that thing is and having to build frames to haul materials proves it in spades

I think those photos (except the last one) are of other methods to haul 4x8 sheets, not Ridgewoods.

I've never cared, I just load in the smaller stuff then I throw the sheets on top. My bed is 6.5 feet, so when I shove them in diagonally, less than a foot sticks out past the back gate. I don't need to tie down the load, because the sheets keep anything from blowing out, and the wind pushes them into the bed.

But that's Jack's schtick, he finds one or yet things that his trucklet does well and then ignores the unibody and modified car's drivetrain. If you follow his threads, you'll eventually believe that your regular ol' pickup truck can't even do basic things like haul 4x8 sheets, let alone logs, aggregate and greasy tool steel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

could have saved yourself a bunch of words bud.

 

 

 

 

 

 

it's a hunk of shite. period

 

/discussion

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, aA said:

 

what an utter hunk of shite that thing is and having to build frames to haul materials proves it in spades

Ummm the trucks with the frames are the other "Real" pickups. The Ridgeline is alone in the midsize market that it can haul plywood and sheetrock flat with no frame joists or other BS. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, aA said:

could have saved yourself a bunch of words bud.

it's a hunk of shite. period

/discussion

 

Boy oh boy you stepped in it bigtime.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This again? It's not a truck. Guy pulled up to get a load of CA6 gravel. They wouldn't load it because the suspension wasn't up to the task. Guy was pissed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had an '89 Ranger that had places to put a couple of 2x4s to hold sheetrock over the wheel arches.  I never considered the Ranger much of a truck but it hauled everything I needed for house and dock work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can't believe Jack so this is what the Russians are saying.  They are our friends now right?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More from our fiends  friends in Russia.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Raz'r said:

So why lie? It's clear you are the same person that used to post as Happy Jack.

Oh, that's right, you lie. All the time.

This is an important philosophical point actually.

People who lie don't just lie about particular things. They lie about everything.

Even worse, they do it to themselves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, random said:

You can't believe Jack so this is what the Russians are saying.  They are our friends now right?

 

That thing looks fugly. Its the Mac 26 of fighter jets and probably design by MIT dropouts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is my favourite aircraft at the moment.

Would be more suited to Australian conditions than the F35 mainly for range

image.png.02a234995bff0f58f506f8ea04b4af15.png

 
Lockheed Martin F-35A Lightning II
Sukhoi Su-34 (Fullback)
Crew
1
2
 
Production
231 units [Diff.+136]
95 units [Diff.-136]
 
Length
50.43 ft (15.37 m) [Diff.-26.15 ft]
76.57 ft (23.34 m) [Diff.+26.15 ft]
 
Width
34.94 ft (10.65 m) [Diff.-13.29 ft]
48.23 ft (14.70 m) [Diff.+13.29 ft]
 
Height
17.32 ft (5.28 m) [Diff.-2.66 ft]
19.98 ft (6.09 m) [Diff.+2.66 ft]
 
Empty Wt.
29,002 lb (13,155 kg) [Diff.+29,002 lb]
0 lb (0 kg) [Diff.-29,002 lb]
 
MTOW
70,107 lb (31,800 kg) [Diff.-29,321 lb]
99,428 lb (45,100 kg) [Diff.+29,321 lb]
 
Power
1 x Pratt & Whitney F135 F119-PW-100 turbofan developing 40,000 lb thrust with afterburner with General Electric GE F120 alternate core engine.
2 x Lyulka AL-31FM1 turbofan engines with afterburner developing 30,000 lb thrust each.
 
 
Speed
1,199 mph (1,930 kph) [Diff.+19 mph]
1,181 mph (1,900 kph) [Diff.-19 mph]
 
Range
1,379 miles (2,220 km) [Diff.-1,106 miles]
2,485 miles (4,000 km) [Diff.+1,106 miles]
 
Ceiling
50,000 ft (15,240 m) [Diff.+787 feet]
49,213 ft (15,000 m) [Diff.-787 feet]

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, austin1972 said:

This again? It's not a truck. Guy pulled up to get a load of CA6 gravel. They wouldn't load it because the suspension wasn't up to the task. Guy was pissed.

Yah, but do you think it would make a good Farm Truck?

 

 

:lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Fakenews said:

That thing looks fugly. Its the Mac 26 of fighter jets and probably design by MIT dropouts.

Gator, I know you're here just to stir shit.  Randy, you may want to go get some of dogs Demonic websites, because yours are even worse. 

 

They are highly biased in favor of Russia and occasionally runs Pro-state conspiracy stories. The Columbia Journalism Review calls RT “The Kremlin's propaganda outlet.

  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, mikewof said:

My son loves my dirty, squeaky, rough-riding truck.

My wife and daughters hate it. They much prefer to take the Pilot. I've no doubt that they would love the Ridgewood.

So you have a good point ... Maybe the Ridgeline Pilot is marketed and targeted for people who crave comfort (unibody), who prefer ease of entry (low floor) and who don't want a their trucklet to be too much like a truck. My old boss loved her Ridgeline, she used it for getting feed for her two show horses.

Hopefully, they weren't heavy bags.

I wanna know why Jack wants to be able to load 4x8 sheets flat, when they'll prevent him from being able to get his wine cooler out of the bed-mounted icebox?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Saorsa said:

 

9 hours ago, aA said:

could have saved yourself a bunch of words bud.

it's a hunk of shite. period

/discussion

I had a chance to look at the new Ridgewood. It's a pretty nice trucklet for women, or suburban tailgating. The bed seemed kinda soft, as did the suspension, and I already have experience with the Pilot engine, blurgh.

But for certain non-work functions, it's kind of neat. Looks just as comfy as that &#!$@ Pilot.

And hopefully Honda includes a six-pack of alternators with every purchase.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Greever said:

Yah, but do you think it would make a good Farm Truck?

 

 

:lol:

It probably doesn't rust fast enough or make the required noise levels. I've had a bull put me up on 2 wheels and the Schooner weighs 8,500 lbs. or so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, mikewof said:

I had a chance to look at the new Ridgewood. It's a pretty nice trucklet for women, or suburban tailgating. The bed seemed kinda soft, as did the suspension, and I already have experience with the Pilot engine, blurgh.

But for certain non-work functions, it's kind of neat. Looks just as comfy as that &#!$@ Pilot.

And hopefully Honda includes a six-pack of alternators with every purchase.

Still on original everything

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this