Often, when a new generation of mainstream car goes on sale, it’s a few hundred dollars more than the old one. Consumers are price sensitive above all else, and not rocking the boat too much is a great way of angling for future sales success. The boxy new 2026 Honda Passport? It’s a few thousand dollars more than the old one, which doesn’t seem great considering how we’ve all been squeezed over the past few years.
Setting price aside, the new Honda Passport seems pretty swell. It’s still essentially a cut-down two-row sibling to the Pilot, and it starts with handsome, squared-off new styling and a great front end, more rear legroom than before, and more cargo space as well. Then it adds a new V6 with hydraulic lifters that won’t require periodic valve adjustment, a beefier Trailsport trim with actual skid plates and recovery hooks, and optional General all-terrain tires. However, we can’t just set price aside. We aren’t talking million-dollar hypercars here, we’re talking crossovers for real families, and Passport families better be bringing in that cheddar to upgrade to the new one.
Let’s start with the base Passport RTL, which stickers for $46,200 including freight, or $2,350 more than before. Sure, it does add wireless Apple CarPlay and Android Auto, which were wired on the old model, but it also takes away full-leather seats. As for options on the new Passport, the towing package is a no-brainer for an extra $700, but the $1,200 upcharge for the RTL Blackout appearance package doesn’t seem like the best use of funds.
Moving up the range, the Otterbox-style Trailsport does gain some extra off-road gear for the new generation, and it comes with nice creature comforts like a panoramic sunroof and a heated windshield, but it also rings in at $49,900 including freight, or $3,450 more than the old one. Oh, and if you want blacked-out trim on top of that, tack another $1,200 onto the price tag.
The top-trim Honda Passport for the outgoing model year was the Black Edition, which basically murdered out all the trim and piled on the options, adding such amenities as a premium audio system, ventilated front seats, and a hands-free tailgate. Well, for 2026, things are a bit different. The top Passport Trailsport Elite trim now builds on the off-roady mid-range trim, and a blacked-out visual treatment is optional on top of that. If you’re looking for a full-jam Gotham-spec Passport, the new Trailsport Elite Blackout costs a whopping $55,100 including freight – that’s $5,180 more than last year’s Black Edition model. If you wish to skip the Autozone-ish visual treatment, you can get a Trailsport Elite without the black trim for $53,900, which cuts the year-over-year delta to $3,980.
Still, that’s a big price jump. In fact, all trims see pretty big price increases for the new generation, which is cause for trepidation in an age of increased focus on affordability. As it stands, $46,200 to $55,100 is a lot of money to spend on a family car, especially when you can buy a Hyundai Santa Fe or Subaru Outback for a lot less coin. The new Honda Passport looks pretty good, but I worry about its pricing. It was already expensive for a mainstream midsize crossover, but four-figure increases threaten to push it out of reach of more people.
Top graphic image: Honda
Support our mission of championing car culture by becoming an Official Autopian Member.
-
The All-New 2025 Honda Passport Is A Pilot In A Rugged Flannel
-
This Is The New 2026 Honda Passport Before It’s Officially Unveiled
-
Trimflation: Explaining Why Automakers Raised Prices So Much In The Pandemic
-
Here’s How The 2025 Honda HR-V Focuses On What Really Matters: Micro-Review
-
Honda Prologue Owners Are Discovering What It’s Like To Own A GM-Built Product
Please send tips about cool car things to tips@theautopian.com. You could even win a prize!
I’m here to say that I hope they do a similar upgrade to the Ridgeline.
I had a J32 in an Acura TL 6MT. I first checked the valves around 180K. All but 3 were within spec and those 3 were out less than a mil.
Chain driven cams would be an improvement I would like instead. J- engine timing belt changes are an all day challenge.
Seeing as how Honda doesn’t have large trucks (F-150, Silverado, etc) they need a high margin product. Since SUVs are already selling well, it’s a no brainer that they pad the profits on their highest priced product.
I get the potential lack of appeal for not standing out in any particular way, but for someone likely to soon be in the market for a well-rouned 4-5k lbs. tow-capable vehicle, this does tick a lot of boxes. It’s not too huge, the interior space is generous for its size, V6 simplicity is appealing, and it will likely have better on-road manners than most other comparable mid-size trucks/SUVs. Offroad prowess isn’t a significant concern in my case, so my only real gripe is price (which is a more general issue at this point) and certain interior niceties like ventilated seats still being locked to the highest trim.
Yeah, I feel like this is aimed as a direct competitor to the new 4runner, rather than an Outback or Santa Fe. TBH, it probably is what most 4runner buyers are actually looking for. Like my wife. She likes the looks and the appeal of off-roading, but realistically she actually would prefer something with a smoother ride. It looks a little cheaper and pretty comparable to the 4Runner. Also, giving it a V-6 over a turbo 4/ turbo4-hybrid is probably very appealing to certain demos.
Also, very much feel you on ventilated seats. They are so weirdly distributed across the market. Audi S3, not available, but the Golf R, available. BMW 3 series, not available (or at least not recently). It is an option that I want on any vehicle, but it is a weird luck of the draw if the vehicle you want has it in the correct trim.
Came to the comments to say exactly this, with how they’re centering this trailsport trim in their marketing it really seems like they’re going for the 4runner market segment.
It’s not cheap to pretend you go off-roading in the elementary school pick up line.
The world needs more colourful cars.
Honda you’re dead to me!!!
Hydraulic lifters baby! Welcome to the new age!
(I know Honda dealers could make a lot of money on valve adjustments but does anybody actually get it done as a maintenance item?)
My dad has 180k on his j35 Odyssey and I haven’t heard anything about it
Checks notes,
Nope!
I have a Texas ranchette (75acres). The creek crossing requires about 19.7° approach and 20.8° departure angles. It does not require awd/4wd or all that much ground clearance (7.3″ suffices). I know the stats, because my wife’s 2021 pilot manages without issue. I’m shopping around, and this is a weirdly difficult minimum requirement to meet. All I want is smaller suv without a big honking nose. So far I’m only confident of the kia seltos, ford bronco sport, and subaru forester wilderness. Maybe the chevy trailblazer activ trim? Not viable (sub $40k) Honda option, as far as I can tell.
I know I’m thinking crazy thoughts here, but could you build in some changes to the creek crossing. No judgement call though if you like driving through the creek the way it is now.
ah, but then I can’t justify a nice 4Runner when I finally do want a $50k suv!
This is enthusiast thinking at its finest!
Bronco Sport with the 2.0L is generally good. Also look at the Mazda CX-50 Meridian, which has 18.3° approach and 24.6° departure angles according to a third-party site, and could possibly have better angles with a taller tire or other minor tweaks. Does the RAV4 TRD have any appeal?
Trailblazer has a garbage 3-cylinder.
Forester has CVT issues and general Subaru issues.
Seltos seems like a good value but I don’t trust their engines yet after the whole GDI debacle.
I’ll look into it! One weird thing is that it can be very hard to determine what cars have aero chin straps that can easily be removed. Those approach angles are often not published.
Yes it’s reasonably expensive, but still not a horrible value considering predicted reliability and resale value. I’m the target demographic for this (in Ash Green for sure) but immediately threw it out because I absolutely despise push button shifters. What is this, a ’55 Packard?
Honda’s isn’t just a push-button. It’s a Bop-It! in shifter form. Push it, pull it, squeeze it, smash it… One of my least favorite gear selectors on current vehicles.
It’s not cheap, but neither is anything else any more. It’s also worth keeping in mind that yes, it is a lot more money than the old one, but Honda really half-assed the outgoing Passport, IMO. It was just a less-useful Pilot. This generation offers a significant step up from the previous one in basically every way. They also offer two other very affordable SUVs below this, so I don’t see the harm in them offering a more expensive niche-y one.
So this is a bit anecdotal, but when we were shopping for our Pilot the dealers were pushing the Passport pretty hard. The models were too close to each other, both in size, content, and price. Aside from the Trailsport trim, most people just went for the Pilot over the Passport, so the dealers had non-Trailsport Passports sitting on the lot. We needed the third row, so the Passport wasn’t an option, but I can see why Honda moved the new Passport into the “active lifestyle” niche to reduce the copious amounts of overlap it had with the Pilot. Too bad the price is insane, because I certainly like the looks.
And now — at least from what I’ve seen — the Trailsport Pilot is the go-to model for a lot of people. I see them daily, even though the Passport Trailsport had a few years’ headstart (and was admittedly not much beyond cosmetics). I just never saw the value in paying more money for less car, especially when they’re almost identical.
Passport is like Ford Edge or Toyota Venza in many ways — nothing really wrong with it, but its siblings are crowding it.
Maybe a price hike is what they need just to make buyer feel a little more smug or something 🙂
Interesting. I’ve only seen a few Pilot Trailsports, but nearly every Passport I see is a Trailsport trim. As always, it must be a regional thing.
What a great color, to bad Honda will only build 5 in that color and the rest will be in 50 shades of gray, black, white, and silver.
I think Honda is where VW was in the year 2000. They can’t seem to build the uber reliable things they did in the past, so they are making a shift to be slightly upmarket which is a dumb move imo.
Yep. But these will last more than 5 years, which is nice.
/rehabbing my 2001 top-trim VW as we speak
//wow I forgot how much smoother and quieter it was compared to new stuff
That you are right on.
Your MK4 is smoother and quieter than new cars?
It’d be less quiet if it was running!
haha!! It’s pretty quiet when not running too!
B5.5 Passat, basically a cushier Audi A4 in disguise. They put a lot of work into NVH and suspension, and it shows (30-valve V6). Just pray you don’t need major engine or suspension work because it’s not fun. Over 20 years with this platform (2 cars) and I’m in the “ostrich head in sand” phase now.
Of course it’s more expensive. Honda says that it’s built for off-roading, so you pay a bit more for the solid rear axle with a locking diff, selectable low-range transfer case, body-on-frame construction, and excellent approach/breakover/departure angles.
You had me in the first half…
Don’t forget the snorkel, lightbar, and roof top tent that come standard with the top package
1998 Passport LX was $22,700, which is $44,333 today. Not all that far off.
The passport has been around for 27 years?! I could have sworn it came out 10 years ago.
I think they came out in 94? And they were cousins with the Isuzu Rodeo at the time
Did I miss it, are there front recovery points? I try to not “off road” without front recovery points.
Yeah they’re at the absolute bottom of the front bumper so you can smash them into small rocks.
Just like all the new Toyotas.
EDIT: Wait no, the Tundra does not have any front recovery points.
I’m guessing people who test drive the 4Runner and don’t like that it drives like the truck it is will be perfectly happy with the Passport.
My daily is a ’20 PP & I had a 4Runner as a rental and yeah, this is a pretty damn accurate take.
This is in the segment I’m going to be shopping in in the next few years ($50,000 cars that can haul a family but still have soul) and I really want to love it. I think the exterior looks great, I appreciate that it has a big NA V6 that’ll probably run until the heat death of the universe, the interior is simple, not overly tech-ey, and well designed…and if we all want to be honest with ourselves it’s probably all the capability that 99% of us need.
…but I just feel like something is missing. I’ve given Truck Dudes a lot shit over the years but I’m almost starting to get what drives people to want them, and it’s not being honest with yourself about what you really need. It’s emotion. It’s about having something cool that you can do whatever you want with, even if you aren’t going to. It’s about character.
And this just seems to be writing checks it probably can’t cash. The ground clearance is lousy, there’s no transfer case, it’s front wheel drive based all wheel drive and not four wheel drive, etc. The V6 is a selling point and I’m sure it’ll be softer and more pleasant around town than a truck….but do you know what’s way more cool?
…a truck. And this is almost the exact same price as a 4Runner, which has exponentially more capability, more space, optional third row seats, an optional hybrid powertrain, and let’s be real here….it’s way cooler and is an institution. If you tell your buddies you have a 4Runner they’ll be like “hell yeah brother” and even normies will be like “oh that’s a name I recognize and those trucks are neat”.
If you tell them you’ve got a Passport they’ll either know you have repackaged Pilot or not know it at all. I just think that (and I’m an idiot, to be fair) if I bought one of these knowing I could’ve had a real truck would always be in the back of my mind even though this would probably serve me better. And I don’t think I’m alone, for better or worse.
Anyway, between the aforementioned 4Runner, the Land Cruiser, the Bronco, the Wrangler, and (insert off road capable pickup of your choice here) I just don’t think this will be as much of a draw for enthusiasts….and on the other side of the equation Subaru now has hybrids. I do think some normies will see this and be like “oh cool, a boxy Honda, Hondas run forever” and buy them, but I’m not sure if it really has the chops to compete with the actual trucks.
…speaking of which, someone needs to talk me out of getting a Sierra or Silverado with the Baby Max because Mercedes’ excellent article and my subsequent research has convinced me that I want that powertrain, even though I don’t even vaguely need it. Thanks in advance for your service.
Well said, as a currrent Wrangler owner on my 5th jeep and have owned a Toyota and Ranger Pick up. There really is not much in this car that an actual enthusiast would want. Low range is a minimum and clearance is a close second. I may replace my jeep with a Bronco, landcrusier, 4 runner, but Not a honda.
Already tried, brother.
And then came around to my argument to an extent, as a good enthusiast pal should
I love Mercedes writing and the deep dives she does. But I don’t let her articles convince me into purchasing anything (other than maybe a camper someday). I’m just not that adventurous. If I was, I’d probably be furiously kicking the fenders of a W8 Passat on the side of the highway right now.
At these prices, I wonder if even the default Honda Normals will take a look around. I could see if they were particularly desirable or interesting or had something that stood out, but they’re totally just another Standard Universal Vehicle. TV shows could use these with covered badges.
I was talking to a doctor the other day (whose husband is also a doctor, so they do OK) and she was complaining about the prices of cars, mentioning that her “just a GMC” Acadia cost as much as her Audi (which she liked, but replaced because it was an Audi and it did Audi things).
doctors complaining about how expensive it is to own multiple luxury cars is hilarious.
I take it that it shows how bad it’s gotten. I don’t think it’s so much complaining about affording it as that they’d rather not pay that much to drive a halfway decent boring kid schlepper. There’s no joy in those kinds of vehicles, so they stand out even more as an expense. Me, I would have gone even cheaper as, if I’m going to hate it anyway, I want to pay the least amount possible.
Then again, maybe not. I have an Equinox rental right now as some asshole speeding in slippery conditions spun out into me on the highway and this thing is pretty bad. The seat is uncomfortable with restrictive bottom side bolsters (WTF for? I could corner harder in a shopping cart), the HVAC takes forever to blow hot, the transmission has to be woken up from a coma to transfer power from every stop, and the AWD system is a bad marketing scam. The tires aren’t amazing, so I blamed them at first, but I went to get the mail and had the front tires in snow with the rear on pavement and they just spun like an open diff FWD. I checked it several times to make sure it was in AWD mode and the power would not transfer to the rear even when there was a little bit of traction at the front until I also put my foot on the brake. Surprisingly, the little 1.5T accelerates this thing OK enough and is getting about 27 mpg. Anyway, I arrive home a lot more aggravated in this thing than I do in my manual sports car that people think would be terrible in traffic.
I am assuming if you compare trims across this, 4Runner, Bronco, etc. that for a given price you get more of the cool capabilities (off-road geometry, suspension, transfer case, lockers, tires, etc) with the others and more creature comforts with the Honda.
For many, that is the right balance. It looks ruggged, most people don’t know what transfer cases and lockers are and don’t need to, and you don’t have to yell if you want to make a phone call on the highway.
Of course, I said to “hell with that” and bought a Bronco because it was cool, and life is short and the window to buy cool cars seems even shorter. But I am pretty sure my better half and even my little ones would be happier with something like this.
This is literally where I’m at. We have a 7 month old and a dog and my Kona N is already too small for us to use for weekend trips. The plan is to try to have one more. My wife has a CRV that’s fine for now but won’t be fine once a second wee one is in the equation. Unfortunately we’re both going to need bigger cars in the next few years.
My wife, who is not particularly fond of my loud, noisy hot hatch that rides like the wheels are welded to chassis, was ecstatic when I said “hey I’ll probably need an SUV in the next couple of years”. It was music to her ears because she’s not a car enthusiast and SUV=good to her.
So here we are. I’m putting together a list of options and my main criteria is “does it have character or is it a soul crushing crossover”. Since I’ve been daily-ing an inefficient, unrefined car for the last 3 years the refinement compromises of a body on frame truck don’t really bother me. Naturally a Wrangler or Bronco are on the list and so is the new 4Runner because I think it looks sweet.
My other idea is just getting a half ton truck. I’ll never be out of space, there are several young boys in the family that’ll be all over it, and most of all they’re one of the only ways you can still get a cool engine in a non luxury car. There are V8s aplenty, I think the Hurricane straight 6 seems cool as hell, and as I mentioned the Baby Max diesel in the GM trucks fascinates me.
But would I use anything I listed to its full capability? Of course not. The new hybrid Forester would probably be perfect. But it’s not cool….
VAN
This is just another bad minivan for people who refuse to be seen in an actual minivan, butched-up edition. If you don’t need the added capability that something like a 4runner brings to the table, what IS the point of this thing? It can handle a *slightly* rougher gravel road than a Pilot can manage? Or an Odyssey for that matter?
As for the BabyMax – what is the point of a diesel that saves you a little bit of fuel cost and then absolutely negates that and then some with added maintenance costs? That oil pump drive belt alone that requires the transmission coming out (WTF!) every 150K is going to wipe out any fuel cost savings – and God help you WHEN the diesel emissions or injection stuff fails. And it’s not if, it’s when. The biggest issue with modern light-duty diesels is they just aren’t compatible with most people’s actual use of a light-duty truck. For the emissions system to work correctly, the thing needs to get run harder than most people ever will who use it primarily for shuttling back and forth to the office. A vehicle I would only ever lease.
the passport is only a two row and the new generation of passport is actually evolutionary in off road performance. more ground clearance better angles. its more like a honda version of a grand cherokee. Jeep is hemorrhaging market share and those customers seem to be gravitating to honda and toyota.
2-row minivans used to be a thing, and the current Cherokee is useless too. “SUVs” with no actual offroad ability are just stupid. That’s a *station wagon*, except station wagons actually drive properly. And you are out of your tree if you think this thing has enough offroad capability to bother with.
everything is relative. a vehicle is a tool it either meets your needs or it doesn’t. i’m not sure about ‘enough off-road capability to bother with’
TFL seemed to be impressed with it’s capabilities.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SRUth71pz_Y
TFL is easily impressed. I drove my 2wd ’82 Subaru down trails like he is driving that thing when I was young and dumb. And it’s easy to be impressed when it’s not your vehicle bought with your own money. This minivan would not survive long if you actually use it off road very much.
This is one of the most exhausting arguments that I see on this site. BUT WHY NOT A MINIVAN?!?! IT’S THE PERFECT APPLIANCE?!?! YOU DON’T NEED ANYTHING ELSE!!!!
…if we all just bought what we needed and nothing more than enthusiast cars literally wouldn’t exist. Do you think every Ferrari or McLaren is taken to the track? Of course not, but I never see people on car blogs bringing that up. Does every convertible owner drop the top every time the weather is nice, and if they don’t are they wasting the potential of that car? Is it a waste if people in fast EVs aren’t blasting to 60 in two seconds and lighting their tires up every time they’re behind the wheel?
It’s silly and pedantic and we should support people driving what they want if it makes them happy. That’s called enthusiasm, and I like all of what I listed because I find the engineering and capability to be fascinating. Another good example is watches, and I collect them. Do I need multiple automatics? Of course not, I don’t NEED any watches because my phone tells the time.
But I personally think the craftsmanship and art behind them is amazing and I look down at my wrist whenever I wear them, go “hey that’s pretty neat”, and it brings me a little joy. I’d have the same experience with everything I listed, and I think little
joys are necessary and underrated.
But if it makes you feel any better I absolutely will be doing actual off-roading in whatever I buy because I’m not going to buy extra capability and waste it. I bought a track capable car and didn’t feel like it had fulfilled its purpose until I took it to the track a few times.
It would be the same with me and a truck/SUV. I’ll feel wasteful unless I give it opportunities to do what it’s best at, at my wife has already said she’s interested in doing trails, driving on the beach, etc. And we have assorted watercraft in the family that I’d be able to help with towing too.
Anyway…the TL:DR is I get where you’re coming from but I also think it’s okay to just enjoy a car because you find it interesting and exciting. That’s what enthusiasm is all about my friend!
There is nothing interesting or exciting about another “me too” CUV with delusions of butch off-road ability. It’s fake bullshit, like a Timex with fake visible gears and a fake winding knob, to continue your watch analogy. If you want an AWD station wagon with a lift kit so you can tackle 4″ of snow and the gravel parking lot at the soccer field, fine, but don’t give me this “off road ability” bullshit with it – because absent all the ACTUAL things you need to go off-road it doesn’t really have any.
You may never take your Ferrari to a track – but it absolutely CAN do that. This thing is not going offroading, ever. Unless your definition of offroad is a whole lot smoother than mine is, or you are really willing to expensively break it.
Did you not read my comments? I’m going to look at a Bronco, Wrangler (probably the PHEV), 4Runner, and maybe a few pickups, etc. I joked that a Forester would probably meet most of my needs just as well but I don’t want to be in an NPC mobile.
If you aren’t going to USE the capability of those vehicles, why the HELL would you pay the price in cost, fuel economy, maintenance etc. to own one? I own a Land Rover Discovery because I actually USE the capability of the thing – there is just no reason to otherwise.
What is an NPC mobile? I wouldn’t want a Forester because they are awful to drive.
I have listed several ways that I plan to use them but you ignored them. Honestly you’re just kind of rage posting in an unorganized manner and contradicting yourself at this point, maybe go take a quick walk around the block or something.
Your contradictions are encouraging the argument. You said a Forrester would meet your needs, but now say that you listed several ways you would use the capabilities of the other vehicles.
One facet of this old conflict is that there is a difference between a subject matter enthusiast and a consumption enthusiast. The subject matter enthusiast tends to want the thing only because of its capabilities since they plan on experiencing those specific benefits. A consumption enthusiast enjoys spending money on things largely because of the social perception tied up in owning them.
It isn’t an either/or thing and most people fall someplace in between but the conflict is largely based on not appreciating that there are multipletypes of enthusiasm that overlap over a single object like a car.
If you get a truck you’ll have to help all your friends move. Also strangers will approach you at the gas station with political hot takes because of your truck.
If I get a truck I’m taking every opportunity to do truck stuff that I can and I’m putting a pride sticker on it the day I take it off the lot.
Full disclosure, I also own a minivan, a PHEV. I describe it as driving a video game. Sometimes that is what you want, but not always.
I always find the love around minivans in the comment section a little perplexing. Unless interior volume is the most important thing to you, they’re not that exciting.
And this concept of using the capabilities of the vehicle, why does that apply everywhere else? How come nobody says minivans are dumb because I don’t carry a 30 cubic foot box around all the time?
I love a station wagon but I do think a lot of the minivan adoration comes from a similar desire to rally around something that most people have decided they don’t like.
Why would a minivan be exciting? They are just useful. And FAR more useful than the typical 3-row CUV with delusions of butchness.
Ultimately, anyone can buy anything they want, and use it to do whatever they want with it. I reserve the right to think they are idiots, and I have very little tolerance for style over substance.
In the absolute, yes a minivan is probably more useful to most people than a CUV. But if people who buy Jeeps and don’t off-road, or buy trucks and don’t tow are idiots, so are minivan owners who don’t drive around with 6 passengers and a bunch of cargo. Why do we get a pass?
Who buys a minivan and doesn’t use it for what it’s meant for? They are the most rational of vehicle purchases.
Or a van? (Sorry have to try)
No apologies necessary, I know what I’m signing up for when I come here haha
I’m checking in late, but I have to agree in principle with others in that I think you’re wrong unless you get what I think you should get, which isn’t necessarily the same as what they think you should get. Besides, they have no dog to hunt in this.
And speaking of dogs: you really should prioritize the dog. Or dogs, as having two dogs is less of a financial hit than having two children, and if I’m going to be messing around with your choice of cars it’s only a small step further to messing around with your family planning as well.
Also: A V60 Polestar isn’t that much more than a nice 4Runner, is easier to park in the District than a full-sized truck, and won’t require a Pride sticker. Besides, the cab of a full-sized pickup will be a little tight with more than one child and more than one dog strapped in, and you really shouldn’t put either children or dogs in the bed, even if you get one of those crash-tested crates for each dog and/or child.
But that’s just my opinion, which is always correct. Have you considered a restomodded GM clamshell full-sized wagon from the ’70s? You really should.
I’ve always been intrigued by the Polestar wagon but the combination of the $70,000 price tag and the longevity concerns of maintaining a Swedish overboosted 4 popper/PHEV combo have forced me to shy away.
If Volvo sold the V60 without the idiotic Stripper package at a rational price I would probably own one. You can get the Outbacked version that way, and you can get the sedan that way, so WTF Volvo? I am not paying Mercedes money for a damned Volvo. And I agree with your fears for the longevity of that drivetrain. Nooope, and especially not used.
Volvo has a really good certified program that is probably the way to go if you’re getting a secondhand one. It’s well worth the premium IMHO. They also ditched the dreaded T6 engine that was both supercharged and turbocharged in 2022 or 2023, which also helps. I think I’d be fine rolling the dice on a turbo 4, but a turbo 4 and a ridiculously complex PHEV system feels like a bridge too far.
I wish Volvo had a six cylinder option in the V60 or V90. Audi puts the 3 liter Turbo V6 in the A6 Wagon and Mercedes offers their inline 6 in the E Class wagon. I’d love more power in a Volvo but the only way to get it is by adding a battery pack and electric motor.
They don’t even sell the non-Outbacked V90 in the US anymore. But I agree, four cylinders is not really enough in that class/price of car for NVH reasons. I don’t need more power, but I want that silky-smooth luxury car experience that my Mercedes wagon provides and Volvo wagons do NOT anymore. That ended with the I6 in the 965/V90, IMHO.
Straight 6s are really hard to argue with. The combination of smoothness, power, decent sound, and comparable fuel efficiency is hard to beat. My dad has an X5 50e with the B58 and I’ve driven a mild hybrid base X5 with the same engine but without the PHEV assistance, and that engine is every bit as good as it’s hyped up to be.
I haven’t driven the Benz straight 6 but it seems to be held in similarly high regard…and my mom has an SQ5 with the Porsche/Audi codeveloped turbo V6 and while it can’t match an inline six on efficiency it’s smooth, powerful, and sounds surprisingly good. It rumbles, pops, and has a pleasant engine note at full throttle.
I don’t mind turbo 4 poppers and currently daily one in my Kona N. It’s great for what it is and the lack of refinement is a selling point for a $35,000 hot hatch….but in a $60,000ish luxury wagon I’d have a hard time settling for a 4 cylinder.
Good V6s are fine too (but there are plenty of lousy ones) – there is nothing in it between the 3.5L V6 in my Mercedes and the 3.0L I6s in my BMWs in terms of NVH, though being of different generations the Mercedes makes a LOT more power. I find sixes to be a happy medium, V8s and more are more than I have any need of.
I actually really like turbo 4s *in the right car* – owned plenty of them in Saabs and VWs and my Fiata. But they have no place in a luxury car.
There really are no “minivans” at this point. There are just vans and BIG vans.
I would agree with that. Minivans aren’t so mini anymore.
The MPV was the perfect size.
It certainly was a minivan.
Whether it was the perfect size depends on what you need to do with it. The last time I rented a van, a Pacifica was actually not quite big enough to fit the 8′ long panels I needed it to transport, but I was able to make it work since I had no passengers and was able to fold the front seat back and cram it in. A full-size van would have been ideal.
Hold on, does this imply that Honda was previously selling an engine in 2024 that did not have hydraulic lifters and required regular valve jobs? Or is this just a bit of unnecessary detail, like saying it’s a fuel-injected V6? Because if it’s the former, wow. o.O
Also, as someone who would prefer blacked out trim to chrome most of the time, these blackout packages are extortionate (not just Honda). I will never pay four figures for something I could do with $50 in plasti-dip. I guess someone must though since they all offer stupidly expensive options for it.
This V6 is also Honda’s 1st DOHC in the U.S. (the NSX had it but that was an Acura here). Here’s the write up from 2023 in C&D. It puts in perspective how long the ol’ SOHC V6 was around.
https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a42662418/honda-35-v-6-engine-dohc/
Wow, and here I was thinking Toyota was always last to adopt new tech. That’s crazy.
In Honda’s defense it had direct injection- the 4Runner kept with the 4.0L using port fuel injection instead of the newer 3.5 V6 in the last gen Tacoma which was direct injection.
Direct injection just means that in addition to needing valve jobs, it also needs periodic walnut blasting to clear the carbon out of the valves. 😉
Apparently, that’s only if it’s German- or maybe Korean-made (ironic in that Germans pioneered GDI in WW2) and a big one of those issues was HPFP failure that ate cams and whole engines. I had over 200k and 180k miles on a Focus SE and ST respectively and had not a single issue or loss of performance, mileage, or drivability related to DI (only issue with either of them was that I had to replace the EGR valve on the ST that caused a slight stumble, which was part of a recall, but was cheap and easier to just swap out myself every 75k). They never had any of that blasting or cleaning fluid done and I never installed a catch can (but the guy selling these tells me my car will blow up if I don’t instal one and he has a spreadsheet on his website to prove it! —A few rubes on the ST forum). DI is pretty much standard now, so many normal people drive cars with it and probably the only ones getting that done on the majority of the cars are the type that gets talked into everything at dealers or quick lube places (You need to change your harrameter filter. We’re running a special this month…). Not a single person I know—and people ask me a lot of car questions—has asked me if an expensive walnut blasting is really necessary or commented about having any of the issues we’re told will happen by the people selling snake oil.
Carbon buildup definitely happens in pretty much all DI engines, but whether it causes a noticeable problem is a valid question. I suspect in most cases it will hurt airflow through the valve ports a bit, but unless it manages to build up on the valve seats themselves most people will be able to drive with it and never notice.
I mostly though it was funny that Honda picked the one technology that can introduce additional maintenance on an engine that apparently already needs an excessive amount of maintenance. 🙂
I agree that it happens (carbon build up isn’t new to DI, anyway), I just think it’s not a real world problem.
I knew Honda had used solid lifters for a while, but it was only recently that I found it they had still been using them and I was shocked. And I thought they stuck with distributors too long back in the 90s! I wonder how many owners actually have them adjusted. If I didn’t know that, there’s got to be a cargo ship load of owners who don’t and many people buying Hondas pretty much throw away the service book, so maybe they just don’t become a problem often in real life or people are vigilant enough to hear some ticking and get them looked at? Modern oils are awesome.
I still have my ST. Those ST forums in 2012-2016 were something….
The need for walnut blasting is getting less and less as automakers figure out better PCV systems and rings and specify better oils that create less blowby to start with. The carbon buildup is NOT caused by GDI, rather it’s because unlike IDI, there is no fuel constantly washing the crap off the valves. That’s a bug, not a feature, but it’s a bug that happens to be accidentally beneficial. It’s the blowby that the PCV system is dumping into the intake that is getting baked on the valves. Eliminate the blowby, or do a better job of filtering it out, and the problem goes away.
The cool new thing is to have both DI and PFI. Toyota does it in several of their vehicles and I think some other manufacturers do as well. I give the 4Runner the ol’ Italian tune up every once in awhile to clean off the valves.
An unnecessary complication – just figure out PCV and make the issue go away. I’d rather have to pay for a walnut blasting once in the life of the vehicle (and I probably won’t own it long enough to have to do it) than pay for and have to pay to maintain TWO injection systems.
There are still some engines out there that lack hydraulic lifters. Usually they use large bucket tappets that wear so slowly that you only ever have to do manual valve adjustments if the camshaft is taken off or some other unusual event happens. No specified service interval.
I’m with you on paying for these naff murdered out trim packages. Ridiculous. And I HATE black wheels with a passion. A car needs a little jewelry on it.
Sigh. Too bad the new Scouts aren’t out. They’d beat this up, steal it’s gas money and laugh all the way past the pump.
I expect to see these everywhere once the lease pricing gets announced.
RUGGED BLACK PLASTIC TRIM™
Rubbermaid should start saying they build their trashcans out of automotive-grade materials.
And start having their trash cans fade in the sun after a few years? No thanks.
Rubbermaid has had plastic figured out for decades. No need to downgrade to ‘automotive-grade’ materials.
But wait, there’s more!
Trump just announced a 100% tariff on Canadian made cars, so it’s double the price.
Won’t this be produced in their Alabama factory like the outgoing passports?
Tariffs raise the prices of all goods. However, it looks like Paul is joking, though you can never tell these days.
oops, it’s the Pilot that’s Canadian built.
2026 Honda Passport: For when you want to spend 4Runner money on a Pilot with an REI Membership, Fewer seats, and checks written by its looks that its chassis can never cash.
Other than the lack of low range and true offroad capability, I like everything about this more than the new 4Runner.
Signed, a 5th gen 4Runner owner.
And for a lot of people that may be exactly what they want. I just don’t see the value proposition in spending BOF SUV money for a crossover with a body kit and marketing to suggest it’s as capable as a 4Runner. It’s nearly 5k higher base than a Pilot, CX-70/90, and similar cars that are just better values overall. This gen Passport doesn’t seem like a bad vehicle by any stretch, but it does seem undeserving of it’s price tag given what it offers.
As a fellow 5th gen owner I’m with you. I like that Honda stuck with the V6 vs. a I4 turbo then everything else. The Passport has enough offroad ability for me (mostly sand in the Outer Banks) but should ride significantly better than my 4Runner (and get better fuel economy with the 10 speed). The Hybrid in the new 4Runner is not really a plus for me in that it detracts from the load space and really take up a lot of the rear.
Goddamn is that expensive. I’ll give Honda credit, it looks a hell of a lot better (the last gen and Pilot equivalent looked like ass before) but I’m not seeing much here that justifies a 46k minimum. My guess is that Honda is hoping to snag a few buyers who have no idea that this isn’t a 4Runner competitor.
I was thinking the same thing. For someone who just wants the look, this is actually a compelling choice over the 4Runner, but it’s really missing the name cachet for that price. This pricing is not too far off the TRD Offroad Premium 4R, which is in a whole different league when it comes to offroad capability. One would really have to like the Honda to pick it over the 4R.
Doesn’t this still have a NA V6?
I could see that appealing to some folks over mandatory turbo/hybrid, even though I myself am not much of a Honda guy.
Yeah, apparently Honda is going to stick with the N/A 3.5L for another generation. I’m actually thinking the turbo motor in the new Yotas is going to be a big improvement, but the jury is out on long term reliability.
I’m not a Honda guy either, but I DO like the look of this, and Honda does have a pretty capable AWD system, for what this is. There’s a youtube channel, JonDZ Adventuring, who does some pretty difficult trails with a modded previous gen Passport. Honda actually had him involved with the original Trailsport rollout.
I am missing the logic of buying a honda becasue it rides nicer than a 4runner and then modding the hell out of it to make it “almost” as capable off the pavement as 4runner and wrecking the nice ride. People could just get the 4runner.
It is cool to see moded things off road that were not intended to be there though.
Yeah, that logic is fuzzy to me too. When I first stumbled on his channel that was my first thought – “Why not a 4Runner?”
He addresses that fairly often in his videos, it comes up a lot in the comments. Basically, before he got into off-roading he had an FJ Cruiser and didn’t really enjoy driving it. He traded it for a Subaru, then got into doing Subaru stuff and ended up grenading the CVT. He then got the Honda for soft-roading, then fell down the rabbit hole of modding it. He claims it is still nicer to drive than his FJ and can manage 20+ mpg even with 32″ tires on it. Plus, some people just like to be different, and doing milder trails in a less capable vehicle can be fun.
I’ve noticed in recent videos that a few of his regular buddies have switched from Hondas and Subaru’s to Tacomas, 4Runners, and GX’s, which make everything much easier.
I watch his videos and can’t help but compare to my mostly stock 4Runner – I still don’t 100% get it, haha.
If he is having fun and getting clicks and eyeballs on his channel. good for him but I agree with you.
Yup. He’s got a day job in the medical field, but he’s out there living his best life on the weekends. I envy him.
But I also feel like the same people who would care to have a V6 over a turbo 4 are the same people who wouldn’t want to own butch-adjacent SUV based on a minivan.
I mean, I love me a minivan with a V6 but I’m a weirdo.
I’ve never bought an SUV new, so I don’t know how it typically goes, but my guess is one half of the couple wants something that looks truck-like, the other half wants something that rides well, and they just kind of muddle around until they buy whatever has the best incentives that month.
So you might be right.
I think the likelihood that the V6 would sway someone is low, but I think your rationale for why Honda will still manage to sell a bunch of these despite the product being entirely unremarkable is sound.
I hardly ever believe bigger is necessarily better, but I do get a little confused as to why someone would pay more to buy one of these over a Pilot.
Styling and image. Just like a ton of other cars. Why do people pay roughly 10% more a 4 Series over a 3 Series? They are the same dang size, wheelbase, performance, and effectively weight for a 10% price differential just because people will pay more for 2 massive doors or a swoopy roof vs a standard 3 box design. See also Land Cruiser vs 4Runner, most GMC vs Chevy counterparts, Bronco Sport vs Escape, literally any appearance package, etc. Lots of companies do it. I question the price of this personally, but I’m betting I’ll see a lot of them at my daycare during drop off.
I guess I’m not seeing the aesthetic advantage over the Pilot that I would get with say, a coupe over a sedan. Its a better effort than the first Passport (or should I say second?) but it just seems like a bad value to me.
And i totally agree we’ll be seeing these everywhere. I just hope some of them are in that orange.
I have a friend that has zero interest in 4×4’s or off-roading in general, but she’s on her 2nd 5th gen 4Runner. Her current one was bought brand new after she saw the release of the 6th gen.
She’s never going to use the capability, but she loves them because they last forever and hold their value.
She’s not wrong about the value, she got 12k in trade for her 2012 SR5 with 200k miles, bad brakes, and body rot. She paid like 18k for it in 2018 with 75k miles.