mmarshall

Thanks. Haven't driven a recent Pilot, but I've heard mostly good things about them. Reliability would likely be better than the Pathfinder's, which has generally been average.

But, in some ways, the Pilot is not a direct comparison. The Pilot is unibody, car-based, built off of the same platform that produces the Accord sedan/coupe and Odyssey minivan, lacks a 4WD Low range for off-roading, doesn't have a V8 option for heavy towing, and, of course, is more limited to on-pavement and light off-roading conditions than the Pathfinder. And, while I have not directly sampled it for confirmation, the Pilot's ride would likely be a little firmer, overall handling better, and road noise level higher then the smooth-riding but poor-handling Pathfinder. The Pilot, in Honda tradition, would probably not have much in the way of factory incentives either, like the Pathfinder does.....Hondas usually don't.

I would consider more direct Pathfinder competitors to be the Ford Explorer (but not the Mercury Mountaineer twin, which lacks a 4WD Low range), Jeep Grand Cherokee, Mitsubuishi Endeavor, Toyota 4Runner/FJ Cruiser (though, of course, the FJ is more quirky), Chevy TrailBlazer, lower-level models of the Dodge Durango, and (possibly) the Land Rover LR3, though the LR3 is a little more upmarket..

mmarshall

Well, not really. The Pathfinder was always considered a mid-size SUV......it still is. The only real difference between the present third-generation ones and the last, second-generation ones is that they now are body-on-frame, truck-based instead of unibody, car-based, and they now have the very important full-time AWD for on-road use. Sizewise, it hasn't really changed that much over the years, and if you see one parked next to big-brother Armada, you will notice the difference in size.

mmarshall

Two things. First, remember that this was a top-level Pathfinder LE model....essentially lacking only NAV and the optional V8. Lower-cost S and SE Pathfinders are also available. Second, I agree the FJ is cheaper, but some of that can be traced to its interior, and the quality of materials Toyota uses inside. The FJ, admittedly, has unconventional looks and retro styling inside, but I'm not terribly impressed with the plastics (which is also the case with some other recent Toyotas)

Granted, the Pathfinder, like other recent Nissans, was also unimpressive inside for the third-generation model, but Nissan has worked hard on that in the last couple of years, and, with the exception of some seat-design problems (which I outlined in the review), it shows.

Shoyuu

I don't know the physical dimensions of the different generations, but I guess it just looked bloated to me. The pathfinders I remember were back in the early 90s like this:

VS

Maybe I'm being fooled since it has 3 sets of side windows as opposed to 2 on the old ones and another pair of doors.

mmarshall

Being a two-door model, the door was also longer, which can affect the perception of overall length. The rear roofline on the new model, however, DOES look a little longer, but that is because of the more squared-off feature (which helps the cargo room) compared to the more tilted-forward line on the earlier model. It doesn't necessarily mean the vehicle itself is longer.