Honda Pilot

Honda Pilot

Honda Pilot has 7 generations in this catalogue, all SUV 5-doors. Dates overlap on the third generation because the restyling starts 2018-06-01 while 3 generation still lists a stop of 2019-02-28.

Honda Pilot has 7 generations in this catalogue, all SUV 5-doors. Dates overlap on the third generation because the restyling starts 2018-06-01 while 3 generation still lists a stop of 2019-02-28.

Engine and specs

Every version is named 3.0 AT or 3.5 AT. Same name, different output: always pair the name with hp and drive.

Power per litre uses displacement 2997 or 3471 where measured. 4 generation displacement is not measured, so hp/l is not measured.

Engine position: 3.0 AT is Front, transverse. Third-generation 3.5 AT (280 hp) is Front, longitudinal. First generation and 4 generation 3.5 AT are Front, transverse. 2 generation engine position is not measured. Compression: 3.0 AT 10.5; third-generation 3.5 AT 11.5; second-generation restyling 10.5; second generation and most first-generation rows 10.0; one first-generation 258 hp FWD compression not measured. Bore × stroke: 3.0 AT 86 × 86; 3.5 AT rows with a figure 89 × 93.

The 3.0 AT is the densest engine in the file (83.1 hp/l), 2.4 hp/l above the 280 hp 3.5 AT. The 249 hp 3.5 AT of 2 generation, restyling sits at 71.7 hp/l — 11.4 hp/l below the 3.0 AT. Peak catalogue power is the 4 generation 3.5 AT at 289 hp, 9 hp above the 280 hp third-generation 3.5 AT and 49 hp above the first-generation 240 hp 3.5 AT.

Performance and economy (0–100, top speed, mpg)

Fuel figures below are l/100 km as given (city / highway / mixed). No conversion to mpg is stored in the source, so mpg is not measured as a separate unit.

Fastest measured 0–100: 7.1 s (3 generation and 3 generation, restyling 3.5 AT 280 hp FWD). Slowest measured: 10.5 s (1 generation 3.5 AT 243 hp AWD) — 3.4 s slower than the fastest. Highest measured top speed: 192 km/h on both 3.0 AT rows. 4 generation 0–100 and top speed are not measured, so 289 hp does not automatically win a sprint you cannot time.

AWD cost on the 280 hp 3.5 AT (restyling): +0.2 s, city +0.7, highway +0.3, mixed +0.5. On 2 generation, restyling the AWD 3.5 AT is 1.3 s slower than FWD (9.9 vs 8.6) but mixed is 0.8 l/100 km better (11.6 vs 12.4) because highway on FWD is 10.2 vs 9.1. 3.0 AT mixed 10.4 beats every measured 3.5 AT mixed figure; its highway 8.2 is the lowest highway number in the file.

Range from mixed consumption where both tank and mixed exist: 3.0 AT restyling 73 / 10.4 ≈ 702 km; 3.5 AT FWD restyling 73 / 10.7 ≈ 682 km; 3.5 AT AWD restyling 73 / 11.2 ≈ 652 km; 2 generation, restyling AWD 80 / 11.6 ≈ 690 km. 4 generation tank not measured, so range not measured.

Dimensions and weight

Wheel sizes are listed only on third-generation 3.5 AT rows: 245/60 R18 and 245/50 R20. All other versions: wheels not measured. Suspension on every row: Independent, spring front and rear.

Lightest measured kerb: 1832 kg (3 generation, restyling 3.5 AT 280 hp FWD). Heaviest: 2062 kg (second-generation AWD rows). Spread: 230 kg. Best kg/hp: 6.54. Worst measured: 8.50 on the 240 hp FWD 1 generation 3.5 AT. Highest clearance: 203 mm (2 generation all three, plus two 1 generation rows). Largest tank: 80 l (both second-generation blocks). Gross mass peaks at 2765 kg in generation 2 and falls to 2650 kg on the 3.0 AT and 2580 kg on several first-generation rows.

Payload where both masses exist: 3.0 AT 2650 − 2008 = 642 kg; 2 generation AWD 2765 − 2062 = 703 kg; 1 generation, restyling AWD 2580 − 2050 = 530 kg; 1 generation 240 hp FWD 2580 − 2040 = 540 kg. Third-generation 3.5 AT gross is not measured, so payload there is not measured.

Problems and reliability

This catalogue file has no failure rates, service intervals, or defect lists. Reliability in the sense of “what breaks” is not measured. What can be compared without leaving the numbers: later 3.5 AT rows switch from Distributed injection (multi-point) to Direct injection (direct) at 280 hp; 4 generation injection is not measured. Rear brakes are Disc on most rows and Disc ventilated only on 2 generation, restyling 3.5 AT 249 hp AWD. Front brakes are Disc on 1 generation and Ventilated disc from 1 generation, restyling onward (including 4 generation). Euro 4 is recorded only on generation 2; all other eco class fields are not measured. CO2 is measured on exactly one version: 2 generation, restyling 3.5 AT 249 hp AWD at 273. Fuel grade 95 appears on 2 generation, restyling FWD, two 1 generation rows, and both 4 generation 3.5 AT; the rest of the measured field is 92.

Which version to choose

If the job is the lowest 0–100 and the lowest kg/hp: 3 generation, restyling 3.5 AT 280 hp FWD. It is 7.1 s, 1832 kg, 6.54 kg/hp. The pre-restyle twin is 7 kg heavier (1839 kg) with the same 7.1 s and the same mixed 10.7.

If you need AWD on that engine: 3 generation, restyling 3.5 AT 280 hp AWD. Versus FWD you give 83 kg, 0.2 s, and 0.5 l/100 km mixed. Versus the 3.0 AT AWD in the same restyling you gain 31 hp, 62 Nm, 1.8 s to 100, and you lose 15 mm of clearance and 0.8 l/100 km mixed. Highway on the 3.0 AT is still 8.2 against 9 on this AWD 3.5 AT.

If mixed fuel and clearance beat sprint: 3 generation, restyling 3.0 AT 249 hp AWD. It is the only 3.0 AT in the restyling, mixed 10.4, highway 8.2, clearance 200 mm, tank 73 l, top speed 192 km/h. It is 176 kg heavier than the 280 hp FWD 3.5 AT (2008 − 1832) and 8.06 kg/hp versus 6.54. The pre-restyle 3.0 AT is the same power, 0–100, fuel and mass, but clearance 185 mm and tank 72 l — the restyling is the one that adds 15 mm and 1 l.

If you want the newest power and gear count: 4 generation 3.5 AT 289 hp, FWD or AWD. You get +9 hp versus 280 and +4 gears versus the six-speed third generation, fuel 95, engine Front, transverse again. You do not get a measured 0–100, top speed, consumption, tank, mass or clearance. Choosing 4 generation is a choice to stop using those scores.

If you want the largest tank and Euro 4 on paper: stay in generation 2. 2 generation, restyling 3.5 AT 249 hp FWD is the quicker of that pair (8.6 s vs 9.9 s) and 103 kg lighter than AWD (1959 vs 2062). AWD is the only Pilot here with CO2 273 and Disc ventilated rear brakes. Do not pick 2 generation 3.5 AT 249 hp AWD over the 257 hp AWD in the same generation: they share 9.9 s, 180 km/h, 16.3 / 9.2 / 11.8, 2062 kg, 203 mm, 80 l — the 257 hp row is 8 hp more for the same measured motion. The 257 hp FWD is 8.6 s but fuel and kerb are not measured.

If you are looking at 1 generation: four 3.5 AT names. The 240 hp FWD is the fastest of that generation (8.2 s) but the worst kg/hp (8.50) and the lowest top speed in the whole file among measured values (175 km/h). The 243 hp AWD is the slowest 0–100 in the file (10.5 s) despite 190 km/h top speed — that is the largest gap between sprint and peak speed in the set. The two 258 hp rows (FWD at 5400 rpm and AWD at 5600 rpm) both do 9.9 s and 177 km/h where measured; FWD fuel is not measured. 1 generation, restyling 3.5 AT 258 hp AWD matches 9.9 s / 177 km/h with tank 77 l and Ventilated disc fronts; its FWD twin has 0–100, top speed, fuel and both masses not measured, so it cannot be ranked on performance.

What “stepping up” buys in arithmetic, not price (prices are not in the data): from 240 hp to 289 hp is +49 hp. From 5 gears to 10 is +5. From 8.50 kg/hp to 6.54 kg/hp is 1.96 kg/hp less mass per horsepower. From mixed 12.4 (first-generation 243 hp AWD and restyle 249 hp FWD) to 10.4 (3.0 AT) is 2.0 l/100 km. From 203 mm clearance to 185 mm on third-generation 3.5 AT is −18 mm. None of those steps require inventing a version name: the names stay 3.0 AT and 3.5 AT, split by hp, drive, and generation.