What, exactly, earns this thing 4 stars?

Is it a great value?

Why so much emphasis on the style and looks of a vehicle. I sit inside the damn thing not on the bonnet. If it’s interior is comfortable and the vehicle is reliable and economic why worry about the exterior.

are you serious? you want to pay that kind of money for a vehicle that you’re going to see in your driveway for then next 4 or 5 years, and not care what it looks like?

The 4Runner has bullit-proof reliability and can easily handle any reasonable off-road situation. It is not a daily commuter so the gas milage (16/20) is not a big deal to us. The wife and I both love it.

http://www.carspyshots.net/showthread.php?t=15174

Hire him ASAP to redo the Pilot, unless you like competing with Toyota for the title “Who Makes the Ugliest Full Line of Cars?”.

Aside from that horrific snout the Pilot is little more than a rolling refrigerator, which is functionally OK, while the Highlander is Toyota at its best (worst?) with all kinds of Bangle-esque lines, angles and slashes torturing ill-proportioned sheetmetal. It competes with the 4Runner for sheer hideousness.

P.S. Every time I see a 911, I only can think of Jeremy Clarkson as he dismisses it as a “Super Beetle”.

And no…. that’s definitely not a compliment.

Agreed. I liked the early HL – I thought the lines were simple but expressive, and the size just right. We have a 4 cyl version….the V6 was too nose heavy I thought…..and it’s perfect for what we need it for.

I don’t know what the hell Honda/Acura is drinking lately but the CRV is about the only decent design (IMO) they’ve released. It seems they go in phases, with every-other generation decent. The last gen Accord, RSX, CL, and current TL are pretty classy…their replacements not so much.

But because it’s a Honda, it’s functional and intentionally Spartan.

I don’t think so. Just say it like it is. The interior is cheap, the engines aren’t really strong, and the only design element is the grill, which makes you look like a twat.

And unpretentious? It’s trying to look like a macho SUV but it’s not!! What could be more pretentious!!! Arghhhhhhhhhhhhhh!

I find both of them were uglified with the latest resign.

Faster than 80% of the SUVs on the road is probably more accurate…Plus what am I doing worrying about SUV 0-60 times – especially when my daily driver is a 2008 G35xS (which is a real world mid-to-high 5 sec machine)…I rarely drive the wife’s 08 Highlander and when I do, I’m usually pulling a boat.

the highlander does not “hold its own” vs a cayenne turbo. the facts:

from Car and Driver: “As you’d expect, the new Turbo is quicker than the outgoing model. The 0-to-60-mph run takes 4.8 seconds (versus 5.0″

from Car and Driver: “The new Highlander proved to be reasonably quick on our drive along the high-speed, placid mountain roads between Portland, Oregon, and Washington’s Mt. Adams, as well as in our acceleration testing—0 to 60 mph in 7.0 seconds”

One drives like an SUV and looks like a Scion, the other drives like an SUV and looks like one too.

now, what honda needs to do is take that v6 and put it in the CR-v and Element.

I would respectfully disagree. I applaud Honda for sticking to 4 cylinder engines in those models and continuing to develop them into class leading powerplants.