As the North American International Auto show got underway and the press were given a sneak peek at what was going to be on display, awards were given out for all kinds of things. While most of the awards seemed reasonable to me, one stood out: Truck of the Year.
This award was given to something that I hadn’t expected: the Honda Ridgeline. I can’t say that I was surprised by this—the Ridgeline is a great vehicle and I think it is very deserving of an award. What annoys me to some extent that it received “Truck of the Year”. It’s not that I think that it’s a bad vehicle or that I think the Ridgeline is a bad truck. I disagree because the Ridgeline isn’t a truck.
And here’s why:
Trucks are designed to be able to tow and haul. They’re working vehicles. They also have a relatively standard construction (to be clear, we’re discussing trucks of the ‘pick-up’ variety). They’re of a body-on-frame design with rear-wheel drive (RWD) which aides in its ability to carry or tow heavy loads.
The Ridgeline is considered a ‘Sport Utility Truck’. It’s a unibody, front-wheel/all-wheel drive, car chassis-based vehicle that can haul people and stuff. It’s a close relation to the Honda Pilot Sport Utility Vehicle (SUV), just without the enclosed cargo space or third row seating the the Pilot provides. At best, the Ridgeline has the same or slightly better payload and towing capabilities as my ’84 Volvo 240 wagon (also not a truck).
In this way, the Ridgeline reminds me of some other vehicles from American (and Australian) history (and Australia’s present). Throughout the 60’s, 70’s, and 80’s (and all the way through today in Australia) there were strange vehicles that bridged the gap between car and truck. Chevrolet had the El Camino (GMC produced the same car, but called it the Sprint and Caballero), Ford had the Ranchero, and Dodge had the Rampage. They’re all cars with truck beds attached, trucks that can haul some stuff. None of them were ever as strong or capable as trucks. And they were never meant to be. In Australia, they call them “Ute’s”. They’re considered utility vehicles, rather than trucks, since they’re cars you can put some stuff in.
This is the space that the Ridgeline inhabits, just with better ground clearance and optional all wheel drive. Unfortunately, here in the US, we haven’t had a Ute for about 30 years.
The problem I have with the Ridgeline being awarded with the “Truck of the Year” award has less to do with the automotive industry and more to do with common public perception and understanding of what a truck is. To the public, a truck has become anything that has a bed. I’m fairly confident that if Australia’s Ute’s were marketed in the US they would be called trucks—not by the industry itself, but by the car-buying public.
I can’t argue with the fact that car culture is shifting and the lines between vehicle types blurring—it’s a trait of all cultures. In fact, there was a period of time in the ‘80s and ‘90s that there was a category of truck referred to as ‘sport trucks’. These were small, RWD vehicles that, for the most part, were trucks, just without the payload and towing capacity that would make them useful work vehicles (think the Chevrolet S-10).
I can, however, disagree with some of the changes. Like how the general public views utility vehicles as trucks. This is just not the case, at least for now. I suppose my problem with the Ridgeline winning “Truck of the Year” has less to do with people calling it a truck and more with the industry comparing it to the working vehicles like the Dodge Ram, Ford F Series, and Chevrolet Silverado/GMC Sierra.
I can’t predict what the future of cars will bring, but I imagine that traditional trucks will become less and less distinct as we continue designing vehicles that bridge the gaps between each type. We’ve already blurred the line between passenger cars and sport utility vehicles (and it can be argued that SUVs already blur the line between trucks and cars).
–
Image Credit: Michael Gill