:?:
How much weight can be carried inside a 2wd automatic EX? Or should I say what is the maxamum weight I can haul? The salesmen had no clue. Now that I think of it isn't the weight listed on the drivers side door? Since i do not have an owners manual and the car is not in front of me I do not have this information. :roll:

The manual states "The maximum load for your vehicle is 675lbs for US models and 308kg for Canadian. This includes total wt for all occupants, cargo, accessories, and the tongue wt if you are towing a trailer."

675 pounds scares me, especially since I'm 6'3" and about 210 pounds, my friends are all over 6' tall and in the 200 pound range, so 3 of my friends and me in the car would be int he 800 pound range, a full 125 pounds over the weight limit with no cargo? That sounds awefully low.

- Takr

I have a 2WD EX and the specs show a max of 675 lbs (includes people, cargo, accessories, I do not have a trailer, so I'm not sure how to address tongue weight impact)

I wondering if that's not the true designed weight limit. Because my imediate family's combined wieght exceeds that by almost 100lbs. I test drove this vehicle with just my wife and the salesman and I know we definately exceeded that. Now I didn't notice any performance hits do to weight. So I'm curious.......

And don't worry, I'm on a diet now so hopefully when my SOP E comes in....we'll be closer to that limit. :roll: :wink:

We just took 3 big dogs = 220lbs and 3 adults = 450 lbs on a dirt road and not a problem. We did not bottom out nor was the engine straining.

Man I gotta say, this worries me.

That is not a lot weight. Admittingly, I never bothered to check the weight limit on the other rollers I've owned but 675 lbs seems LOW.

If this is true, the Element's practicality really takes a hit. I mean flip up the seats, wipe down the floors and stand up through the sun roof all you want, if four 170 lbs adults can't ride in it at the same time, it's not the dorm room on wheels that Honda described in it's promotional materials.

Aren't there some Honda sales people in the house that can look into this more thoroughly?

This is bothering me to no end. Just checked the Ford site to see what the payload weight limit on the Escape was (figured that would be a good comparison) and it's 1,140 lbs. That is about what I'd expect from a small 4X4 SUV with a 4cyl engine.

I know one of you Honda employees in disguise is going to tell me I'm making too much of this and that I shouldn't want to drive around with 3 other adults in my car anyway. But if this 675 lb limit is true, then I'm sorry I bought this thing. No matter how cool it is, this is unacceptable.

I hope we find out that this has been misinterpreted. I don't want to feel like I'm potentially damaging my car every time I head to the bar or ballpark with my friends.

I posted this in another tread but here it is again. I talked to honda canada and the say the 675 is the tested load amount and don't recomend higher.

But.... the gvw is 4453 lb and the curb weight is 3595. Subtract one from the other and you get the maximum payload. 858lbs. (Please correct me if I have this wrong)

Anyway as I understand it curb weight includes fuel. But according to honda canada that 675 number does not include fuel, meaning they think that you pay load is 675 minus fuel. (150 approx) Total payload 545. I suggest you worry about gvw vs curb weight.

Just my thoughs, might have it wrong.

I'm glad someone has brought this up. I was really gung-ho about buying an Element until this point.

I don't know that I'm completely decided against it now--it's still likely--but this one issue is enough to make me significantly cool my enthusiasm and reconsider.

I may still get one because all the other features are so attractive (folding seats, easy to clean out). I do some biking, I play music, and I've been looking for a somewhat economical and practical vehicle I could easily get my amplifier or bike in and out of AND be able to jump curbs to go look at projects I'm involved with for work (I work as a civil engineer). This seems like a perfect vehicle for supporting all of those activities--without having to pay a whole bunch for off-road capabilities I'll never use. But 675 pounds max load? True...I probably won't test that load very often, but I hate to think that if I want to go on a road trip with a few of my friends (which I do from time to time) that I'm going to be flirting with the limits of my vehicle the whole time.

My opinion was probably not needed here since the concern has already been so well expressed, but I just wanted to thank you guys for bringing it up and agree that this is a real concern to me as a potential Element buyer.

If a vehicle does not suit your lifestyle then it is no bargain.

For one reason or another I have disallowed many vehicles even if I loved 'em because of one "flaw" or another.

READ THE SPECS BEFORE YOU BUY! Then make an educated decision. Don't believe the "hype" - it's written by marketers not engineers!

i just took a trip with 5 adults (approx. wt = 840lbs), one big dog (approx. 90lbs), and some sporting equipment for a total of 930+ lbs. and there were no problems whatsoever with acceleration or vehicle sagging. i'm sure there is a huge safety margin built into the 675 figure.

and yes, i realize that the element is only designed for 4 adults, but sometimes you just have to cram them aboard.

shawn

[quote:1adfc1aa14="SPACE E"]If a vehicle does not suit your lifestyle then it is no bargain.

For one reason or another I have disallowed many vehicles even if I loved 'em because of one "flaw" or another.

READ THE SPECS BEFORE YOU BUY! Then make an educated decision. Don't believe the "hype" - it's written by marketers not engineers![/quote:1adfc1aa14]

I intially fell in love with the Nissan Xterra. I still do love the looks of it. But the interior really SUCKS. There were so many things about the interior that I disliked. The carpet had air pockets in it, ( didn't lay flat ). Very poor quality and craftmanship on the inside yet the exterior was gorgeous.
The seats wouldn't lay completely flat for cargo. If you should put anything heavy back there you would run the risk of poking a hole in the seat if you didn't lay a towel or something soft under it. CRAZY :roll:

LittleDogBox
Arlington,Va.

I have read several mentions of the 675 pound (I think) load capacity. I have also read that the AWD/4WD weighs 200 pounds more than the 2WD version. Sooooo -- Does the 2WD get to carry 875 pounds??

I suppose there are issues like center of gravity, since the extra drive train components would be positioned quite low, while payload would be above the floor.

There may also be some difference in suspension components, but economy of scale would suggest not. Would you really stock a whole different set of springs and such because of a mere 200 pound weight difference?

After reading in a Consumer Reports review about the 'wimpy' 675 lbs of interior capacity, I called two Honda dealers to find out what that figure means. I couldn't get an answer. Inside the my driver door it clearly states - Interior capacity = 675 lbs. I'm puzzled. Four adults and cargo could easily surpass this amount. Or even three passenger and cargo. As much as I am enjoying my E I'm frankly a little worried. Can anyone shed light on this?

I don't know what Honda meant, but I hauled ~400 pounds of people and ~950 pounds of IKEA for 180 miles at 70MPH and the E didn't look or handle much differently. Of course, I didn't interview the springs at the end of the trip, but ... :)

While the E's capacity is no doubt higher for generalized loads (say, four heavier adults), the same weight, if concentrated or unbalanced, may impune handling in an emergency situation -- and pose liability for Honda were the weight sanctioned.

Oooooo....I've hauled myself and three other fat bastards in my E, which clearly brought the interior cargo well beyond the aformentioned weight limit. That weight limit sticker looks a lot to me like a speed limit sign...Who's quibbling?

Thanks for the info. Your reply makes sense. :) I feel a little more relaxed now. :wink:

I think since the E is around 3,500 pounds and only has a 4 cylinder's. 675 is a safe figure to haul stuff and not put a lot of stress on the engine :roll:

Most SUV's are V6's and thus will have a higher pay load.

Point I'm trying to make here is that the 4WD always carries a heavier load than the 2WD. Since -- I assume -- the load-bearing componentry is the same, the 2WD should/could logically be *rated* for 200 pounds more.

A 2WD with 200 pounds of dead weight added is now up to the empty weight of the 4WD.

The 200 lbs for the AWD is most likely unsprung weight and if so, it would not affect the load capacity.

Usually springs are different on models with different weight, so I checked and the 2wd and 4wd share the same front springs, but the rear springs are a different part number.

I don't believe it is unsprung weight, on an independent suspension about the only unsprung weight is the wheels/tires/brakes, I believe a solid axle would be unsprung weight though.

Thanks for the info. Your reply makes sense. :) I feel a little more relaxed now. :wink:

You shouldn't feel relaxed. The 675 lb. limit is outrageous for a SUV. Even my Subaru Legacy wagon is rated for 900 lbs.

Honda, I ask you, what is the point of the cavernous interior when you can't safely fill it?

It'd be nice to know what Honda's limitations are for coming up with "675".

Until someone posts a bad experience with exceeding the load limit, I don't think too many folks are going to lose any sleep over it.

Until someone posts a bad experience with exceeding the load limit, I don't think too many folks are going to lose any sleep over it.

You're right about that. Almost everyone will just ignore it. And you'll get it away with it 99.9% of the time. But how sure are you about the emergency handling of your Element at 75 MPH overloaded by 200 lbs? As a father of a toddler, you bet I'd lose sleep over that.

Unlike most people I take the safety recommendations seriously and the payload limit is the primary reason why I will probably get an Odyssey instead of an Element. And this is from a guy who used to read the Element brochure to his son like it was a bed time story.

I hope Honda fixes this with the next generation Element because otherwise I really like it.

It's amazing that anyone born in the 60's, 70's, or 80's ever made it thru childhood with the (judged from todays standards) unsafe cars our parents hauled us around in. ;)

I agree with your point about how it handles in emergencies while overloaded. AFAIK, nobody knows. Plenty of stories on how it handles regularly while overloaded, but no emergency stories. (Thank god) I really wish Honda would disclose the rational behind how they came up with the 675 limit!

I don't know how to check the front spring part mumbers vs the CRV, but the flat load floor and decent handling have a price: it is payload in the rear half of the vehicle.

In other words, I don't think honda can make it better using technology normal to todays production vehicles.

I could be wrong.

Ed

The VW Beatle or Bug has a greater rating in this area.

It is kind of ridiculous. A cavernous interior and it can't hold 4 good size adults.

I think I found Honda's reasoning behind the 675 pound load capacity.

I looked in the Owner's Manual, and it states the total vehicle weight and the maximum load capacity rating of the tires, the difference being 675 pounds. After the Firestone/Ford fiasco, I think I would stick to that formula, and upgrade the tires to a higher rating if I wanted to increase the load limit....

I looked in the Owner's Manual, and it states the total vehicle weight and the maximum load capacity rating of the tires, the difference being 675 pounds. After the Firestone/Ford fiasco, I think I would stick to that formula, and upgrade the tires to a higher rating if I wanted to increase the load limit....

Hmm, according the owner's manual (is it the same for all?), they are P215/70R16 99S. At this site: http://www.discounttire.com/dtc/brochure/info/helpDeskLoadIndex.jsp

...it seems to indicate the total load capacity for 99 is 6936lbs. (4x1709), which is almost double the curb weight of the element. So, I don't think the math works out as you indicated... Did I miss something?

-brendan

Sorry about that Brendan ..... my mistake. I apparently had jumped to a conclusion when I was scanning the manual. Back to being confused :shock:

Sorry about that Brendan ..... my mistake. I apparently had jumped to a conclusion when I was scanning the manual. Back to being confused :shock:

Me too.

In addition, the manual says on page 192: Gross Vehicle Weight Rating (GVWR) = 4,450lbs.

So, that would leave:

Model Curb Cargo
DX/2WD/MT 3330 1120
DX/4WD/MT 3460 990
EX/2WD/MT 3389 1061
EX/4WD/MT 3526 924

DX/2WD/AT 3387 1063
DX/4WD/AT 3518 932
EX/2WD/AT 3439 1011
EX/4WD/AT 3577 873


I don't know if GVWR includes a full or empty tank of gas so perhaps the weight of 15.9 gallons of gas should be subtracted from the cargo number. :)

There'a also the Gross Axle Weight Rating as well on that page, which indicates the rear wheels(2250lb) should take about 95 lbs. less off the weight the front wheels (2300lb) can take. Perhaps the 675lb value mentioned elsehwere is based on an engineering equation using the above minimum value of 873 combined with likely cargo/people placement and current weight distribution of the vehicle?

I don't know if GVWR includes a full or empty tank of gas so perhaps the weight of 15.9 gallons of gas should be subtracted from the cargo number. :)

Cars.com indicates that curb-weight *includes* all fluids topped off and a full tank of gas. Good thing too, since 15.9 gallons is...ouch, really heavy! If not included in curb-weight, that would have subtracted ~100lbs from the carrying capacities I computed.

EDITED - replaced GVWR references with curb-weight references above.

Some of you might have seen my response (in "Shopping") to the guy wanting to carry half a ton of canoe gear... and on rough roads. We already know that's not going to happen.

Recalling some structural engineering classes from a zillion years ago, his question got me to thinking that the weight capacity issue with the E may simply be one of too much unsupported structure. That extra-wide pillarless door opening leaves a lot of area in the vertical plane without visible means of support. Too much weight, and I'll bet that you will experience measurable distortion in the body structure, especially diagonally across the side door frames.

:shock:

This sent my head spinning about the reported problems with 1) the windshield cracks and 2) the back side doors not latching, or rattling and clunking, or other problems indicating adjustment or alignment problems.

In other words, I think people are "bending" their E's, with linear flexing in the vertical plane on each side, plus torsional flexing. It's the torsional flex that's going to crack windshields, and the linear flex is going to mess with the doors. Neither should be happening, but in my non-professional engineering opinion, both would be no surprise at all... at least not to me.

I'd be interested in what Honda has to say about this. There might just be some added under-body bracing in my future E's future.

This was my concern. I did not know that the capacity was 675lbs but I had thought the frame looked very flexable.

Really a 1000lb capacity is not unreasonable. 675lbs is. That's less than most mid sized cars.

Pat

P.S. I am a raft rower, not a kayak or canoe paddler. That means I carry all the beer. :)

675 lb total for cargo and passengers is just rediculous. I love the look and idea of this vehicle, but I'm not going to buy a car that I can't even tote around me and 3 friends my size.

I'm sad, but happy I found that number before I owned it.

Good luck everyone. I'm already missing a vehicle I never owned.

Remove the two back seats which weight 42.5 pounds each, giving a 85 pound increase, or a 12.6% increase. Total new capacity = 760.

Now go eat your donuts again.

Mmm, donuts.

-brendan

I increased the weight limit easier than that...I just keep putting more and more sh!t in it.

I will remove all three passenger seats, and the spare tire. :lol:

I, and many others, find the "load capacity" of the Element oddly low.

Think about it....with 4 moderate sized adults, you have already exceeded the weight limit. That really seems odd.

Any chance Honda could be assuming that payload is in ADDITION TO the 4 passengers?

Just a thought....

IF THAT is so, Solution THEN is very easy........kick out 3 adult passengers averaging about 200 pounds each(not that unreasonable), and you have just boosted your payload capacity 600 pounds. :?

>Any chance Honda could be assuming that payload is in ADDITION TO the 4 passengers?

Asked of and answered by Honda: "No." The 675# rating includes passengers.

[quote:5f8909406f=" "]>Any chance Honda could be assuming that payload is in ADDITION TO the 4 passengers?

Asked of and answered by Honda: "No." The 675# rating includes passengers.[/quote:5f8909406f]

They can't be serious at all about that. Most 22 year old males I know (myself included) weigh in within +/- 25lbs of the 200lb mark. So, 175x4 = 700, which is 25lbs more than the load rating. If you go to 225 a piece you wind up at 900lbs. So where's the logic in Honda's load rating?

[quote:c82a91259d=" "]Remove the two back seats which weight 42.5 pounds each, giving a 85 pound increase, or a 12.6% increase. Total new capacity = 760.

Now go eat your donuts again.[/quote:c82a91259d]

If you think you will be putting in a lot of stuff, go buy a bunch of helium balloons to fill the space above your cargo...

Good point about removing the seats.

[quote:e668a0b9e1=" "]So where's the logic in Honda's load rating?[/quote:e668a0b9e1]

It's called CYA (cover your a$$).

I'm fairly convinced that Honda simply took the numbers for the CRV and subtracted the average additional weight of an E, since the vehicles are very similar (E has slightly shorter wheelbase, beefier frame, wider/taller, lower floor, everything else is almost the same).

As I've posted elsewhere: if you plan to exceed the limit by any appreciable amount, place as much of the additional mass low and to the center of the vehicle, and drive more cautiously.

I drove an 89 Colt for a while. It was a slug with 4 average people in it and drove completely differently. The E doesn't seem to have this problem.

But I've loaded the E up to the gills helping my brother move. Only then it feels like it's heavy, and therefore I drove more cautiously...

-brendan

>So where's the logic in Honda's load rating?

There isn't any. What's even wackier is there is no distinction in the "rating" between a DX 2WD 5-speed and an EX 4WD auto - yet there's a 250# difference in curb weight.

Paraphrasing what Brendan said, it's mostly a lawyer number.

I suspect the real "start worrying now" number is double the 675, or 1,350. Would anyone care to test this theory with a trip to the concrete block yard?
Er, I'm kinda busy.

I did a road trip to Canada...4 people, rear cargo hold FULL, cargo box on roof...FULL, and ski rack...you guessed it full.
Rough estimate of payload:
975#

Not only did I not have any problems, I was still able to pass people on the road into the coast mountains, on the way to Whistler.

jesse

Ok, this is confusing me, I'm kind of a big guy, around 270 and about 6'2, most of the time I'm in the car by myself, but sometimes i do take 2,3 or four people with me some of whome are also kind of on the heavy side. Now my question for you, oh great masters of the E, is would it be feasable for me to purchase one or should I just stop looking at it and go for something else? Thanks in advance.

I'm in the 250 lb range myself and constantly have 1,2 or 3 people with me...can't do 4 as the E is only a 4 seater.

No issues, not a one...

jesse

[quote:f5c3231152=" "]I'm in the 250 lb range myself and constantly have 1,2 or 3 people with me...can't do 4 as the E is only a 4 seater.

No issues, not a one...

jesse[/quote:f5c3231152]
Thanks you very much for your help, I plan onl joining you happy Element owners very soon. After having a fuel pump, a transmission, and both front wheel hubs go it's time to get rid of my '99 Blazer and buy something reliable. Oh and you are right, what I meant to say was I sometimes have myself and 2 to 3 other people with me for a total of 4, my bad. Thanks again.

[quote:67e82b68b2=" "]

Paraphrasing what Brendan said, it's mostly a lawyer number.[/quote:67e82b68b2]

You nailed it.

The only problem I had on my recent camping trip to Tn. was other drivers flashing there lights at me my lights were higher than normal. My E was loaded with 3 people 2 dogs the back was full AND I have built a luggage carrier that attaches to my reciever hitch. It was loaded with 2 coolers a lantern and cook stove.
I was able to cruise easily at 80. Come to think of it, it might even have been a good thing. The wind had everyone struggling to stay in there lane around Nashville. I was also buffeted but maybe the extra weight kept me from hitting that Winnabego :roll:

keck - heh.

But just for the record, i want to reiterate: when one is driving a vehicle loaded down like that, particularly back heavy like that (as evidenced by the headlights), drive more cautiously as your handling capability and braking distances can be reduced. A smaller percentage of the vehicle weight is over the front axle, after all...

-brendan

675 Lbs? I don't buy it. I was going to a concert for my church and I had 5 guys in the car including me, one of them weighs 240 and two are 200 and another guy that weighs 180. And, i also had a bass amp in the trunk with speaker cabinet both weighing in together at good 150 pounds. so that's what? 970 pounds for passenger and cargo. and my headlights were still fine and i've got those HID lookalike bulbs.

OK, it finally occured to me that we have a 2000 Accord with basically the same engine. I just dashed out to the garage and read ITS load capacity.

2000 Honda Accord passenger sedan load capacity= 850 pounds

2004 Honda Element Big Box for hauling stuff vehicle capacity= 675 pounds

What is wrong with this picture???????

Has anyone run this buy anyone at Honda?......
:roll:

I am still wondering if that is the load capacity of the element in ADDITION to 4 average sized passengers? :?

[quote:015568810f=" "]I am still wondering if that is the load capacity of the element in ADDITION to 4 average sized passengers? :?[/quote:015568810f]

No, it's total listed capacity.

The reasons and implications have been covered many many many times in other threads. Do some searches on "capacity".

-brendan

[quote:a0716b4146=" "][
it's mostly a lawyer number.[/quote:a0716b4146]
quote]

The owners manual, it seems full of these lawyer numbers. On the towing capacity, on the luggage rack, on the fluids, etc. Why is Honda DOT3 brake fluid incompatible with any other DOT3 brake fluid? Aren't the purpose of the DOT standards for brake fluid compatibility?

Why is Honda DOT3 brake fluid incompatible with any other DOT3 brake fluid? Aren't the purpose of the DOT standards for brake fluid compatibility?
It is possible to meet the DOT3 standard yet still be incompatible. My edu-guess is that Honda specs a different polymer formulation for OEM seal components, and off-the-shelf fluids result in long-term issues such as swelling (and its cousin, premature deterioration).

This applies to other areas as well. You also need to pay heed to the special Honda formulations for transmission oils (both manual and A/T) and the power steering fluid. Using just any auto-store fluid in these areas is in fact asking for trouble. Better parts stores will stock 3rd-party brands that cover the Honda specs.

[quote:bc9f5f892b=" "]
It is possible to meet the DOT3 standard yet still be incompatible. My edu-guess is that Honda specs a different polymer formulation for OEM seal components, and off-the-shelf fluids result in long-term issues such as swelling (and its cousin, premature deterioration).

This applies to other areas as well. You also need to pay heed to the special Honda formulations for transmission oils (both manual and A/T) and the power steering fluid. Using just any auto-store fluid in these areas is in fact asking for trouble. Better parts stores will stock 3rd-party brands that cover the Honda specs.[/quote:bc9f5f892b]

If you don't mind my asking, what is your basis for your eduguess? Can you point me to a source that says some DOT3 fluids are incompatible? It just doesn't make any sense. I would be more inclined to believe this if they didn't say the same thing for every fluid in the vehicle (like motor oil.)

When Honda buys brake seals, why would they specify that the seals should not be compatible with non Honda brake fluid? Honda doesn't make most components, they buy them from the relatively few manufacturers that produce them. For anti-lock brakes, for example, there are only three or four companies in the world that make them (Lucas, Delphi, Denso, and perhaps ITT Automotive.)

It would also open Honda to a lot of warranty expense, since if I top off the brake fluid with regular DOT3 and the system were damaged, it would be nearly impossible to prove it short of sending the fluid off for a chemical analysis.

Now, I do know that it would not be wise to use antifreeze containing silicates in a Honda, as that has caused problems with the water pump seals on the Goldwings, but that does not only apply to Honda.

Best,

Judging with my experience of towing with an Explorer, I can tell you that manufacturer's #s are a crock of...yeah you know. ;)

I am very surprised the 4WD Elements have the same rating as 2WD. Almost always you will see 4WD with a lower tow rating due to the added stress on the drivetrain components. Also, the automatic and manual trannies have the same?

It sounds like Honda doesn't have a lot of faith in their drivetrain system.

I don't really see it as much of a problem. I think Honda is assuming that you EITHER have the rear seats full of people - OR- the rear filled with cargo and no seats. You cant have both at the same time.

Now I see how those with roof racks and stuff in-tow would fall much higher above their "safe" number.

And overall, thats what's good to remember... it's their "safe" number, not a physical reality.

As far as the Civic being rated higher - perhaps that just means because of the Element's height/wheel-base, etc. it deserves a lower "safe number" so the lawyers can sleep at night (Although I cant imagine how any lawyer can sleep without heavy medication anyways.... ) :P

Hey Gang,

Im cross shopping the E, Forester, and Legacy Outback. Right now, I can get an Outback Wagon for 18,500. That includes extras like Fog Lights, Heated Seats, Auto dimm mirror, etc. Anyways, is the 675 lb load with four adults in the car? I mean most of my friend are near 200lb. Im not trying to thread crap. Just want to know if I am understanding the payload number correctly. Thanks!

Some internet searching told me that the CRV (which I currently drive) has a maximum load capacity of 850 pounds. That is 175 more than the "E", though there is less space in the CRV to accomplish that.

My Owner's manual states there is a 675 lb cargo maximum (including people). Can this be right? It sounds like a typo.....675 lbs is not even 4 reasonably sized men! Any input on this?? Thanks.

Wondering if it's a weight limitation from the stock tires....

According to the specs for the HPs (easily found on tirerack or goodyear's web site) the max weight capacity is 1709 lbs when inflated to 44 psi. This number is pretty standard for this size of tire. Increase the width to 225 mm and the max weight increases a 100 lb. I think you have to go up to 225/75/16 to find tires with heavier duty truck capacity (at 55psi).

4x1700 = 6800, well over the GVWR of the Element.

Note also that the recommended tire pressures (32/34) are well below the maximum pressure the tire can take. At these pressures (and vehicle weight) the tires have a reasonable degree for flattening and side bulge.

paulj

as Paul ststes there are alot of posts on this thread... i think they say 675 beacuse of the engine... remember we have a four banger under the hood.... it can only take so much strain. also it could be the suspension... have you ever seen some people driving around with a broekn shock adsorber and like 5 people in their car? :shock: well thats whatll happen. i ahve had about 700 in my ride and it did fine... dont worry too much about going over it :)

I dorve mine from Chicago to northwest Wisconsin full of stage speakers and lighting, and camping gear. Rear seats were out, packed to the ceiling, and the car was sagging a little. Did 70 mph the whole trip. Gas mileage wasn't that great. Moved ok, but still was slower. I prob had 700lbs of equipment.

I wonder how much those rear seat weigh. You take them out and you gain their weight.

I put 870 lbs of landscaping stone in the back of the E with the rear seats out. A bit sluggish on the start, but moved ok after that. Stopping was noticibly more difficult and required more pedal pressure. The rear just barely sagged. I think Honda is completely understating the capacity.

J

here's the E with about 2000 pounds of equipment

http://www.e-shen.com/element/loaded01.jpg
http://www.e-shen.com/element/loaded02.jpg
http://www.e-shen.com/element/loaded03.jpg
http://www.e-shen.com/element/loaded04.jpg
http://www.e-shen.com/element/loaded05.jpg
http://www.e-shen.com/element/loaded06.jpg


like other's have said... the limit may have been understated for legal purposes... but it definately won't carry a ton safely!

I wonder how much those rear seat weigh. You take them out and you gain their weight.I weighed mine when I took them out. They're 42.5# each, so you can add 85# to that 675# if you take those babies out!

I'm old - what's a "ricer"?

"Ricers" are people who fix up Hondas to be Sporty Tuners. Although some Honda engines can go fast (and are usually "sleepers"), you see kids with Honda Civic DX's with huge exaust and intakes. They call them ricers because, well, they trick out Japanese sports cars.

"Ricers" usually refers to the tacky-side of import tuners. Some tuners can be very fast and look great, but "Ricers" will add huge spoilers, V-Tec stickers (or Type R), etc. It's basically parading around as if your car is fast.

Ricers used to be anyone who had an import tuner, but as more and more people were throwing the "V-Tec" stickers on Hyundais it became more of a joke than anything.

Check out some of the "Hall of Shame" pictures here:

http://www.riceboypage.com/shame/

Hilarious.

Thanks Sier! Makes perfect sense now, as my neighbor, who use to own a car dealership (Ford), calls any Japanese car a "rice burner".

Help!

I just bought a 2004 Element yesterday. I understand the payload limitaions are 675 Lbs but I want to take a fmaily trip to Florida in June and need to pack in enough camping stuff for a family of 4 who weigh in at 600 Lbs. Is the Element really limited to 675 lbs? If so, what can I do?

Can I push the payload safely bewyond 675 Lbs and what is the problem with doing so?

Dave

get a trailer ? :lol:

Curiously I could find no mention of the weight limit in the Japanese manual. Lots of warnings about how to use the seat belts, when not to 'run on the flattened seats', and such.

If you are carrying 4 people and the stuff they normally need for a trip in the cargo space, nothing unusual is likely to happen. It will affect handling in various ways, but you, as an intelligent driver, should be able to adjust your driving style accordingly. However if you do roll over, and attempt to sue Honda, the company lawyers may claim you are at fault because you 'over loaded' the car.

Is just bought a 2005 Element and read the owners manual this past weekend. They clearly state that the weight capacity is 675lb. (This is listed on a sticker on the drivers side door) They go on to state that you figure out your cargo weight capacity by taking your passengers combined weight and subtracting that from 675lb. Whatever is left over is what cargo weight you can carry.

My family has two good size teenagers. As passengers alone all 4 of us are over 675lb. this is a rediculous figure.

Is this a legal disclaimer by Honda or is there a real safety issue here of going over the 675lb?

It's a legal disclaimer.

Several of us have had well over that weight on several occasions and never had a problem.
If it wasn't for our sue happy society, that "rule" wouldn't even be in the book.

The only thing I've found to be careful of is the weight you place on top of the spare tire cover. Remember, it's only plastic. :roll:

I want to say its a misprint.

your fine just drive safe!

-tom

I had unplugged call the honda tech guys about the tailgate weight limit, the 400lb limit that was mentioned here they say is bs. They call 700lbs which I think is BS. I wouldn't even try to go over 400 but if I did max would be 500.

Oh and I have easly had 800lbs in my E on a 30 min trip on more than one occasion. No problems anywhere.

:confused: Just bought a new Silver Blue EX Automatic. Absolutely love this traveling box! I was wondering how much cargo weight I can toss inside this bucket?
The manual says it's max is 650 lbs. You've got to be kidding! Is that true?
I have lots of camping gear to haul around and now I am worried about over loading my Element. Does anyone have a take on this? I would like to put at least 800 lbs inside. Is this a problem and if so is there anyway around it?

:grin: Phew! Thank you for that info. Gawd I love this vehicle! Only had it for a week and I was soooo freaked about the 675 lb.cargo capacity. I won't tax my E Box weight wise. Only when I go camping and not by much then either.

No doubt though I will be investing in a little trailer to tow behind it when I do need to haul heavier loads.

I know this has been covered over and over again on this board but I want to add my own overloaded Element story.

Soon after I bought my E I went with three friends to Phish's last concerts in northern Vermont. Two of us are big guys anyway so even before we loaded our camping gear we were probably 250 pounds over weight. With gear make that 450 pounds. We stopped in Burlington, Vermont, to buy supplies for five days. I had a Thule PlayPen basket, with extension, on the luggage rack to carry stuff. In addition to food, we added four cases of beer, two cases of water and a case of pop to my E. Oh, and a bottle of scotch. :grin: The vehicle was so overloaded that the luggage rack bowed down rather than up. I never have been able see over the vehicle before or since. Then I easily could. We drove the 60 miles to the show, waited 12 hours in line to get in and bottomed out once on freshly dumped gravel because the roads into the concert were washed out. You know what happened? Nothing. It drove OK into the show and once I unloaded it, everything popped back into alignment. :)

This has been posted before, but bears repeating: The main concern with overloading your Element is not harming the suspension, bottoming out, or overstressing your engine or transmission. It's braking and handling. Especially when a trailer is involved, you will need to plan ahead, because your E won't handle or brake the way it normally does. The reason Honda posted such low cargo capacity numbers, IMO, is so they could disavow any owner who loads 500 lbs. on the roof and then rolls over in a sudden maneuver, or who jackknifes or rear-ends someone while going too fast with a trailer.

I know this has been discussed at length but I would like to weigh in. :)

If you are a stickler for the numbers remember that you can pick up another 88 pounds of cargo capacity if you remove the rear seats. They weigh 44 pounds each. That makes my available cargo weight 763 pounds (675 baseline plus 88 for the seats).

Thanks guys for the valuable info on my cargo weight concerns.
Going to take our two week old EBOX for it's first camping gig Labor Day week end. A 700 mile road trip to Big Sur. Just the wife and me along with a 20 gallon cooler, 5 gallon water jug, telescopes, kites, bikes, big tent, shade gazebo, portable kitchen, wood, tool box, numerous smaller items, etc. etc. etc.

Gas prices are $2.75 for 87 Octane here in L.A. I bet it will be around $3.20 per gallon along the central coast. Am I going to notice any big decrease in gas mileage when the E is loaded up with gear?

Clam

I paid over $3 / gallon when I went camping there a couple of months ago with the family. I bet it's higher now. Beautiful part of California.

Going to take our two week old EBOX for it's first camping gig Labor Day week end ... Am I going to notice any big decrease in gas mileage when the E is loaded up with gear?
Not if you keep the speed down. On Cabrillo Highway (Calif. Route 1), that shouldn't be a problem!

::Jealous::

Thanks guys for the valuable info on my cargo weight concerns.
Going to take our two week old EBOX for it's first camping gig Labor Day week end. A 700 mile road trip to Big Sur.
I sure hope you have reservations! All the camp grounds down there have been sold out for months for that weekend. If you do have reservations, would you mind sharing? :razz: We will bring beer and marshmallows.

We are only 40ish minutes north of Big Sur and love it down there. We havent been camping lately (going to casinos instead) but we do miss it greatly.

Have fun and if you decide to drive a tad north, feel free to look us up!

OHH And if you are staying in the Pfiffer State Park - try and get campsite 40. Its a HUGE corner site with lots of privacy and close enough to the river you can hear it at night.

Thanks guys for the valuable info on my cargo weight concerns.
Going to take our two week old EBOX for it's first camping gig Labor Day week end. A 700 mile road trip to Big Sur. Just the wife and me along with a 20 gallon cooler, 5 gallon water jug, telescopes, kites, bikes, big tent, shade gazebo, portable kitchen, wood, tool box, numerous smaller items, etc. etc. etc.

Gas prices are $2.75 for 87 Octane here in L.A. I bet it will be around $3.20 per gallon along the central coast. Am I going to notice any big decrease in gas mileage when the E is loaded up with gear?

Clam

be sure to take lots and lots of pix for us :)

1st let me say I have done a LOT of moving in my life and in many different vehicles. I would not hesitate to put 1500 lbs and 2 people in the Element - properly packed of course. Driving with awareness it should not be a problem - although I would hesiatate to do it daily without modifying the suspension and shocks.
The reason many car companies are lowering carrying weights and stating really goofy restrictions, limits etc is because people do things like cram 17 adults and kids into a 5 passenger vehicle, crash, kill most of them and then SUE the auto maker because the car did not handle properly and/or had a mechanical failure of some kind due to the weight and/or there was nothing that said they couldn't cram 17 people in it. The Japanese learned FAST - Americans SUE - even when it is obvious it had nothing to do with the vehicle they still file suit. This way, all Honda has to do is say that the vehicle was loaded outside the clearly stated weight limits and they might escape liability.
Another point to consider is that Asians in general are much smaller and thinner than Americans. What would be a standard weight for a family of four in Japan - perhaps 400lbs? And the same family in the US - perhaps 550lbs? And we have much more "stuff" than the average family in Japan.
So I would load 4 adults and all their luggage and stuff in the E and not worry for a second about exceeding the weight limit.

I believe the limit is because of the standard tires supplied. That size just does not have the wight carrying capabilities of a larger truck tire. The E is rather heavy for those tires.

with just the three dudes I go to footballs games with we top out at closer to 1100 lbs and my E has no problems hauling us to and from the game.

I believe the limit is because of the standard tires supplied. That size just does not have the wight carrying capabilities of a larger truck tire. The E is rather heavy for those tires.

The stock tires (and nearly every tire model in the stock size) have a 99S load rating, that is, 1709 lb at the max pressure of 44 psi. The combined 6836lb is well in excess of the GVWR on the door (4450lb).

paulj

Except that is not quite the whole story. Do you really know what that load rating is based upon? Steady state load that will not begin to heat up the tires due to internal stress. See that temperature rating?? "B"... Not so good.

The load rating is 150% of the GVWR on all vehicles as specified. (And it is not quite so in this case if you believe the E has a higher weight capability than published, huh?) Cornering, wind, and other stresses place a greater load than you can imagine on tires and this load rating is very often equalled, and momentarily exceeded, in normal driving. Also, it is a "P" rated tire, which is not meant for light trucks and vans (Preferred "LT"). We all know that the Ford Explorer came with "P" rated tires that were theoretically able to handle the weight according the tire labelling. But it did not, sadly. Was it a truck, or a "passenger car"?

Make no mistake about it. This is a heavy vehicle. I'd no sooner place "P" rated tires on my former GMC Suburban, or my father's multiple Suburbans, than I'd place car tires on the E. The E is a little SUV that is heavier than the average vehicle of its class. When I first got it, I starting looking for a Light Truck rated tire, but I found none in this size applicalbe to the E tha I'd be happy with.

Couple the safety factoring the engineers use with a little low pressure in an overweight vehicle and the "load rating" evaporates. That is a recipe for disaster when you drive 75 mph all day in an overloaded E in the summer in Arizona. Those who push the GVWR on the E had better ensure their tires are inflated correctly and properly maintained so as to not have a blow out.

ME? I'm trying to find a "Light Truck " rated tire.

When I first read 'P rated' I thought of the P speed rating, which is lower than S rating on HP tires. However when contrasted with LT, it is evident that you are contrasting P metric and LT metric tires.

I get the impression from the tech notes at Tirerack, that the distinction between LT and P tires is a dated one, appicable to earlier bias ply tires than to the modern radials. Some retailers let you search LT sizes separately from P sizes; Tirerack does not make such a distinction

http://www.tirerack.com/tires/tiretech/techpage.jsp?techid=55
http://www.tirerack.com/tires/tiretech/techpage.jsp?techid=70

Of the tires sizes that fit the Element, 225/75/16 is about the only one that I've seen in a both a 'standard' and heavy duty load rating. Almost all the others have a load rating that is based on the air volume of the tire.

If you want to worry about tires at high speed in hot weather, I'd suggest focusing on the speed rating, rather than the LT/P metric. Stiffer LT tires generally don't have as high a speed rating. There are 2 speed ratings on most tires - the A or B letter in UTQG and the 'S' (or similar letters) that is paired with the load rating (as in 99S).
http://www.tirerack.com/tires/tiretech/techpage.jsp?techid=35
Note: S = 112 mph
H = 130 mph (some HP's have this speed rating)
R = 106 mph (HD truck tires)
These more detailed speed ratings originated in Europe, where autobahn speeds exceed 100 mph.

By the way, the BFG TA KO is available in a LT215/70R16 size.
http://www.bfgoodrichtires.com/assets/pdf/all_terrain_ta_kd.pdf
the service description is 100R, 1765 lb at 50 psi

The Bridgestone REVO that various EOC members have bought in P235/70/16 size (104S) also comes in two LT225/75/16 models (110/107R, and 115/112R). That may be the way to go if you want to maximize the load rating (but not speed rating) of a tire that might fit the Element. However that 115 rating, which = 2680 lbs., comes at a rock hard 80 psi. (based on the tirerack spec table).

paulj

Last summer I hauled 1,200 lbs of books about 20 miles which included some uphill stretches. While driving it was obvious you needed more room to stop, but the handling seemed OK. When I stopped and walked around to the back I noticed I could see over the top of the hatch (which isn't usually the case: I'm 5' 5") and the car was riding low like in Shen's pic. It made me nervous and I haven't done that again (it sucked up a quarter tank of gas, too, IIRC).

Prior to that I've loaded 400 lbs in the back with about 500 lbs of passenger and had no problems. Since then I've loaded around 500 lbs in the back (not counting passenger weights) without any ill effects.

How bad is bottoming out for the car in general?

No, Paul... You do not place "P" rated tires onto a Light Truck and expect the tire to last or to exhibit load carrying capabilites as a matter of course. Light truck tires are intended to suffer different load characteristics than passenger car tires. Speed rating, that where the tire is expected to mainatain integrity up that rated speed, has NOTHING to do with the temperature buildup occurring under load at freeway speeds. (That speed at which the tire can be considered to be safe and not suffer degradation. 112 mph in this case.)

I restate... Passenger cars' tires, applied on light trucks, are only ok for around town and trips when carrying passengers under the weight ratings and are considered "static" conditions and ratings. These use a 150% "safety factor" in the rating molded into the tire. Most people never have anything to worry over, being that soccer moms trundle off to school and to the grocery. Where they are at risk is when they take that trip across country at freeway speeds for hours on end. The trucks are heavier and generally loaded at, or over, rated GVWR and it is no wonder the passenger car tires fail like of the famous Ford Explorers.

LT Tires, or Light Truck rated tires, are designed to take loads under dynamic ratings and applied under different rules and are more able to take a load under varying circumstances. LT tires generally inflate to higher pressures and have better/tougher sidewall construction for load.

The E is limited in its weight/load rating because it has a P rated passenger car tire applied/supplied from the factory. With a LT tire, it would be far safer to load the vehicle and travel distances at freeway speed with greater wieghts. LOAD rated tires would increase the E's GVWR. It is NOT the E that is limited..

Maybe we need to clarify something.

When you talk of Passenger and Light Truck 'rated' tires, are you talking about the 'P' v 'LT' letter than may be included with the size designation? Or are you talking about the Passenger v Light Truck/SUV categories that we see on sites like Tirerack.

In other words, are the stock HP tires, 'passenger' tires because they have a 'P215/70/16' label, or light truck tires because they are categorized as 'highway all-season' (as opposed to 'passenger all-season'), and because Goodyear describes them as light truck/suv tires?

I would also like to read more about the distinction between a 'static' load rating (which you claim is used for 'passenger' tires), and a 'dynamic' load rating.

I'm no expert on the Explorer/Firestone issue, but what I've seen does not blame the load rating or metric of the tires. Under inflation (less than 30 psi), high temperature Southern freeway driving, driver inexperience, quirks in the Explorer handling/suspension, manufacturing defects, and tread separation have all been mentioned. As far as I know the replacement tires were of the same size and load rating.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firestone_vs_Ford_Motor_Company_controversy

paulj

I am speaking of the Light Truck, versus Passenger car construction of tires. LT vs P before those little number that designate size.

There is not currently made a tire for our trucks in the LT construction that I can find. Light truck tires are different than passenger car tires in the sidewall strength. The Eagle HP is the closest, and people hate this tire.

"Static" was my description of a passenger car tire rolling down the highway without too much of a load upon it and not subjected to the GVWR often. "Dynamic" was my description of the forces involved for the way a truck tire is subjected to loads that passenger car tires simply are not typically done for long periods of time. (A higher COG causing the forces to compress and shift during loads.) For instance when cornering, a tire's load increases because of the outside tire taking more of the forces of the vehicle weight. (The inside tire feels less loaded. and this does happen on cars, but to a lesser extent. the higher COG compounds this.) This is quite a bit of difference as the sidewall on a LT tire does not flex to the extent of a passenger car tire, nor does it inflate to as high an inflation. Ride quality on the E would be more severe, and people already think of the E as a car, when it most certainly is not.

If you have ever driven a GMC Suburban with "P" tires on it, then driven the same vehicle with "LT" tires replacing them, you would know exactly what I mean. All the Subs I ever drove were heavy for the GVWR unloaded and "wallowed" on highly flexing "P" tires. (This wallowing I describe is the "dynamic" cited above.) The absolute fist thing done on every one of them my family purchased is to ensure LT tires were installed.

If you drive your E as an unloaded passenger car, then almost any tire will be fine. If you subject your E to four people, plus luggage, trailer, and/or roof rack.... you seriously need to look at an LT tire for that kind of use!

The fact that Explorers shod with LT tires as replacements rarely ever experienced catastrophic tire failure resulting in the loss of control the vehicle is irrelevent to you? It's not to me, having experienced truck fleet use and the need for LT rated tires.

Since there aren't any light truck tires in the Element's size, could you point to comparative passenger and light truck examples in the 235/75/15 size. This was stock size for the Explorer, and has been put on the Element.

I also had this size on my 1988 S10 pickup. It came with Uniroyal Laredos. I wasn't all that aware of the P/LT distinction, but when I changed tires at around 50,000 miles, I noticed that my new ones had a 50 psi max rating (compared to the 35 that I was used to seeing). When I asked the tire dealer about it, I was told I only needed to approach that pressure if the truck was really loaded. I did not notice any difference in handling after the tire change (keeping the 35psi inflation).

I'm confused about your mention of the GY Eagle HP. As near as I can tell that's a low profile perforance tire, a far cry from what a truck would use. Such a tire would give the Element a tighter handling on curves, but that would be due to the low profile rather than sidewall stiffness.

Ford attempted to place the blame squarely on Firestone by arguing that GY tires with exactly the same specs did not experience tread separation. If that is true, then any replacement would have been an improvement, regardless of whether it was a 35psi 'passenger' or a 50 psi 'truck'. Fleet operators probably also keep a better eye on tire pressure than the average private owner.

Funny you should say the Element certainly is not a car. Usually the claim is that it is just a Civic with a tall body.

paulj

My mistake... I thought the HP was called an "Eagle". I meant "Wrangler" I have Eagles on my Lincoln.

The Element is most definitely a small truck. (Just like the Ridgeline.) Unibody construction notwithstanding. It is heavy, and tall, and touted as a truck/SUV. If you came right down to it, it is not what I call a truck, but then I used to have a GMC Suburban.

P Radials Flex more in the sidewall. LT radials have less flex and are subject to a harsher ride. If you use your E like a van, then you should have comparable tires. If you use it as a passenger car, then you can get by with P rated tires. The fact I cannot find LT tires for my little Honda truck irritates me somewhat.

The only thing I could think of as I read all the original posts was why would you buy an E if you planned to haul around a half-ton or more of junk all the time? Buy a truck if hauling large loads around is what you're after; the E isn't a heavy duty work vehicle.

Thanks, you ba**ards. I wasn't worrying about this until you brought it up.

This LT vs P tire thing reminds me of an early lesson learned with VW vans. Because the wheels were the same size as many cars, a lot of folks mistakenly put car tires on their vans, ignoring the fact the vehicle is in fact much heavier than a normal car, leading to various mishaps. Since VW vans don't often drive at high freeway speeds, the consequences were usually fairly minor. Having survived that, I know that LT means something (though I confess I don't know the details other than they work/feel better on a van).

I agree with the fact the E is a heavy l'il thing. I'm going to look for LT tires when replacement time comes. I don't threaten any of the speed ratings, but I'd like the comfort of knowing I'll have a bit of extra lee-way when I abuse the weight limits.

If you are confused about the distinction between 'passenger' v 'light truck' tires (of P v LT) I'd suggest talking to a tire professional.

I still haven't figured out what Mark considers to be a proper 'LT' tire for the Element. For a while I was focusing on the P v LT letters that sometimes appear at the start of the size designator. An alternative is to focus on the 'passenger all season' v 'highway all season' category labels - but the stock tires already fall in the light truck/suv bin. Neither of us has talked about looking for a commercial truck tire in our size.

My non-professional opinion is that the passenger v light truck distinctions that mattered in the days of VW vans (bias plys and such) have largely disappeared. Now if two radial tires have the same size and load rating, they probably have similar construction under the tread. You can increase the load rating by a few hundred pounds by changing tire size, or (in a few cases) by picking an LT metric tire, but whether that really changes your safety margine is doubtful.

I don't recall anyone reporting a tire blowout due to overloading and high speed driving. Most change tires because of tread wear, or dissatisfaction with handling.

paulj

I still haven't figured out what Mark considers to be a proper 'LT' tire for the Element.

That's because I have not yet found one. I simply stated that I believe the Element is hampered in it's capacity and GVWR by the tires applied.

I suggest you listen to the tire professionals... LT designated tires have a stronger, less flexible sidewall and are suitable for load carrying vehicles. P rated tires are for passenger cars and are more compliant in the construction and give a softer ride. (Which is a complaint about tires and ride in virtually every magazine and posting here about tires on the E and how people loathe the Goodyear stock rubber. The stock tires are not LT designated, however they are similar in construction to such.)

LT tires generally have a higher weight rating and are more stable under load.

Speed rating is irrelevant to LT or P designations and is a seperate issue.

Dear Forum,

I've been researching the Element load capacity a lot lately, as my initial discover of the anemic 675lbs. was startling. This has been discussed at length on this forum, but when I searched for "2007 Honda Element GVWR" and came up with absolutely ZERO results, I knew that something was up. Honda is evidently embarassed about their payload (why is this figure missing from the E specs, but present for their other SUVs?), but after some thought, I realize why it shouldn't really matter. The purpose of this post it to put some new context into the question of the Element's payload. And since I am a human being wary of mistakes, I'm also putting this out to see if there are any problems with my logic or assumptions.

Speaking of mistakes, if the moderator would prefer I put this into a different forum, feel free to do so or tell me to.

First, the 2007 (3433FWD/3567AWD) weighs about 60lbs. more than the 2006 model (3371FWD/3508AWD), but the GVWR (gross vehical weight rating) is the same (4450lbs). If the 675lb. figure came from some relation to these two numbers, clearly I do not see it, since the difference between curb weight and CVWR is near 1000lbs for the 2007 and 1100lbs for the 2006. These numbers are the numbers "normal" people use to determine payload, which can be attested by many car research websites.

Clearly, the 675lbs. limit is cautionary, since it is well below the theoretical (not to be read break-point) 1000 lbs that has been calculated, and did not vary when the the payload increased for the older model. And 675 is such a round number....

But is this so terrible? Look at the RAV4: it's curb weight is 3389FWD/3501AWD, it's GVWR is 4560 (which I don't understand, since the CR-V and E share the same chassis), and it's payload is 850 lbs. However, the theoretical payload is actually 1200lbs.. So the only difference you get from this much pricier option, on the same chassis, with only a hundred pounds less weight, is a 20% increase in payload, or about 150-200lbs. depending on who you believe. Would that much weight really make a difference? A difference in a few thousand dollars?

A more practical example is driving with four passengers at 150lbs each, (like the manual says), yeilding 75lbs cargo stated, or 400lbs cargo not stated. I personally would expect to carry more than 75lbs if we're going on a trip, but probably less than 400lbs (that's a LOT of crap to have in your car, and remember, you somehow carried that much INTO your car and crammed yourselves into it too).

The anecdotal stories around the boards are cute, but not actually valid indicators of what's at stake. However, it seems that some users on this board are more ambitious than I in carrying craploads of stuff in their E. But this is kinda moot, since the toll of overloading your car is measured in damage appearing years down the line, not whether or not you survived the ride.

Although, if you are really carrying 400lbs of stuff, you are probably only taking along yourself and friend, and at that point, you're around the stated payload, with another 300lbs of safety net (not real safety net, you guys...).

What does this all mean? Well, it seems pretty clear to me that the E was never ever intended to carry much of anything beyond what you would carry on a road trip with some friends, or yourself and friend moving from place to place. That IS the dorm room on wheels idea, anyway, isn't it?

Sedans and coupes have larger carrying capacities. But they only go up to a stated 800lbs. And where are you going to put 650lbs of stuff in a sedan? The comparison between the E and sedans is actually quite interesting, since almost all sedans packed with the standard features of the E cost the same, and do oh-so-less. Larger SUVs can carry more, but then they cost more, are less fuel-efficient, and too big for my taste.

Finally, it's worth pointing out that the difference in payload among all the cars in the small-SUV category are pretty much the same, though the element tends to live on the lower end of this all. But the element is also less expensive by a few thousand (compared to the CR-V) to almost ten thousand dollars. And do any of its competitors have the features that make the E so perfect for exactly what it's intended for: moving around ordinary people and their stuff, going on road trips, and making life comfortable? We're talking yuppies here, and people like me (a beginning graduate student), who need to move around a lot and need something he can sleep in and go on trips in. It'd be pretty extraordinary if I suddenly needed to haul a half-ton of rocks, and I'm not putting money on it.

This is my two cents on this whole issue. A good question might be, why did I just spend about 2 hours trying to sort this all out? Well, I'm finally getting paid (a meager graduate salary, but a salary nonetheless), and I need something that can move me around adequately. I could go cheaper with a coupe or a sedan, but unfortunately, they are surprisingly expensive, which has pretty much negated that advantage. Moreover, none can hold my stuff as I move across country, and the cheaper options don't seem like they would last. The next step was rational, a small-SUV, and of course, the cheapest, most practical, and most laden with safety-features, your E. And then there was this whole emotional thing, because they are rather cute.

Looks like the load rating for the 07 is the same as it was for the 03. We have been debating its significance for a long time - is it a ficticious value to cover Honda's legal rear end? Is is 4 seats x 168 lb? Why isn't it different for 4wd v 2wd versions? etc.

In practice, we have found that the Element will carry 4 people and the stuff that they normally would want to travel with. It is also ok to occasionally load it with a 1000 lb of garden supplies. But a camping with a full load will reduce your ground clearance by an inch or more.

Where you camparing the CRV or the RAV4 with the Element?

When we discussed this issue long ago, we noted that the CRV's payload looked a lot like 5 seats x 168. There may be similar relationships between seats and payload for the Pilot and Ody-minivan.

paulj

Hi Everyone,

This is my first post in the EOC forum. I found this wonderful forum, while researching the Honda Element...and I want to thank all the members, for the valuable info they provide.:)

Now...I really need to vent my dissappointment...to a group who will understand...and maybe even offer some suggestions...

My husband and I test drove the Honda Element AWD EX AT and we LOVED it!!!:D

It seemed like the best value and roomiest SUV in it's class...we were also hooked on the unique styling...and ready to buy ASAP.:)

Imagine our dissappointment...when we read the Consumer Reports review and found out the maximum load capacity is 675lbs!!! :confused: That's barely enough to carry 4 large adults...forget about camping equipment, etc...:sad:

I thought maybe CR had their facts wrong...so I looked up the customer service number for Honda and gave them a call (hoping and praying it was some sort of error). Here's their toll-free number: 1-800-999-1009.

The customer service rep looked up the maximum load capacity and told me that it really is 675lbs, including passengers...and if you overload the vehicle, you are risking a safety hazard and invalidating the manufacturer's warranty! :-o

So...I have to tell you all...that I've read all the threads about load capacity...and all the stories about safely carrying loads that exceeded the 675lb. weight limit...but...

If Honda doesn't even trust the quality of the Element...enough to give it a larger, more reasonable load capacity (in fact...the Volkswagon Bug has a higher load capacity)...and they go to great lengths, not to mention the load capacity (anywhere except the owner's manual)...then there must be a serious flaw or weakness in the design of the otherwise wonderful...Honda Element.

And...I think it's terrible that this model has been out for 5 years and they haven't done anything to increase the load capacity of a vehicle that's promoted as a "dorm room on wheels...able to carry 4 people and all their camping gear, etc...":x

So...I guess I'm not going to be able to purchase the Honda Element...unless anyone has any suggestions about modifications, that can safely be made...to increase the load capacity...without violating the manufacturer's warranty or making the vehicle unsafe?

Thanks in advance for any feedback...

I have to completely agree with the post above. My wife and I test drove a 2006 and 2007 Element and fell in love with the utilitarian design of the E. However, I am also worried enough about the cargo capacity...that we will probably not purchase the vehicle. The E seems like the perfect vehicle to load up wife, kids and the dog and head out camping for the weekend. I guess we shouldn't even think about putting the canoe or kayaks on top.

Can anyone calm my fears or provide any new experiences. I know this subject has been discussed significantly before...but I am hoping maybe there is some new information or some new people can "weigh in" (no pun intended). :D

Well...I just called my local Honda dealer...to see if they could double-check the maximum load capacity...and they were also surprised to find out the vehicle can only handle 675lbs...and they are going to look into this for me.

In the meantime...I called Honda's toll-free number again...and this is what I was told:

1 - The maximum load capacity is indicated in the sticker, located in the driver's side door...so anyone can check the sticker.

2 - Page 169 of the 2007 Element Owner's Manual, indicates that the total GVWR (including the weight of the vehicle, passengers and load) is 4450lbs.

We figured that if you subtract the actual vehicle weight, from the GVRW...you'd be left with an accurate estimate of the load capacity (for passengers plus cargo).

We wanted a Honda Element EX with AWD and AT...which has a gross vehicle weight of: 3661lbs. Subtract that from the GVRW of 4450lbs...and we're left with a maximum load capacity of 789lbs...a little better than the 675lb estimate...but not by much...:-(

I'll post again, if I find out any new info...and if anyone else has new info, please post as well...I keep hoping the numbers will improve.:)

Smiles - Wendy

Wendy, what do you drive now? What are it's numbers? What does your typical load weigh?

If you read earlier discussions about the load capacity, and various trip reports, you will find that few EOC members have problems with the actual (as opposed to paper) load capacity of the Element.

An Element should do fine with 4 passengers and their gear that can fit in the cargo area. It should also be fine with 2 passengers and normal camping gear.

However, if you need a roof top box and a hitch carrier to handle all your gear, you should get a larger car.

Honda has not made significant changes to the suspension, drive train and body since 2003. So rated capacity have not changed.

2007 has some changes in transmission offerings, and in trim, as well as one model that has a suspension drop. These are not things that affect load capacity.

paulj

Hi Guys,
I'm in a 2003 and have taken many trips. Some were to Canada, which included a 185# man, a 138# woman, a 136# dog and camping gear for a 11 days.
We had cook stoves, supplies and the works, no k's on top or canoes, but an SUV tent with other stuff.

Went up Canadian hills just fine. Now I wouldn't pull anything that loaded but the E survived alright. And I left my seats in as we slept on them.......this was before my platform. We used the SUV tent as a living room for rain times.

Honda is being cautious but if one uses common sense you'll be fine.

jurn

Wendy, what do you drive now? What are it's numbers? What does your typical load weigh?

paulj

The problem is...that my husband, myself and our 2 kids would reach the maximum weight capacity of 675lbs...anything else we put in the vehicle would be over the manufacturer's suggested weight limit.

That's why I am so dissappointed.:sad:

I always thought Honda was an excellent company...but they really dropped the ball with this weight limit...and it's crummy that they hide the limit from prospective buyers. :mad:

I'm willing to bet that most of the members of this forum...didn't know about the weight limit, before they purchased their Element...and now they're just trying to make the best of things...because they can't do anything about it.

Just because the Element doesn't fall apart when you load more than 675lbs...doesn't mean that you're not doing any damage to the vehicle...such as bending the frame, straining the engine, etc...:-o

I think there was even an engineer who posted info about this in the forum...people experiencing cracked windshields, doors that don't close correctly, etc...which may be due to overloading the vehicle and bending the frame.:confused:

And...675lbs really isn't enough for 4 adults...how many men do you know who weigh in at under 200lbs? So what...this car is only for women, teens and kids?

It just seems like such a low weight capacity, speaks of a poor design...and Honda should make the needed improvements, to allow up to 900-1000lbs to be safely loaded into an Element.

Then it really would be the compact "dorm room on wheels"...that they advertise.

This would have been the perfect vehicle for us...if not for the weight restrictions.:cry:

There is no evidence that windshield cracks or the need to adjust the door jams have anything to do with overloading or bending of the 'frame'. Some have worried that the lack of B-pillar might weaken the the Element - but of course the Element does have B-pillar - it is part of the rear side doors. Remember that the body of the Element is designed to meet federal side impact standards. On both federal and insurance institute tests the Element has fared well when it comes to body deformation under impact.

I am pretty sure that the 675 lb limit is not based on a carefully engineered analysis of the body strength. Even if it was, engineering nearly always includes a safety factor of 2 or 3. In other words, you should be able to put 1200 lb inside the Element without bending the body. Look also at reliability ratings for the Element. Overall the Element has one of the best records. I am not aware of any maintenance issues that could attributed to overloading.

If anything weight limits like this are based on vehicle dynamics. The suspension is tuned to behave well up to the gross weight limit. Beyond that, handling will deteriorate gradually. In other words, the car won't corner as well. Placement of the load is also important. Hanging it off the back, or piling it on the roof will hurt handling more than centering it under the rear seats.

When I load my Element with a two weeks worth of camping gear, I notice that rear ground clearance drops by about an inch. I estimate this from the clearance between top of the rear tire and fender. It does not, however, adversely affect handling (though I am not a hard driver).

If you still need to focus on the weight limit numbers, I would suggest buying a pickup. Engineers pay more attention to payload issues when designing light trucks, so the numbers are going to be more realistic. If you want to stick with Honda, look at the Ridgeline.

paulj

That's because I have not yet found one.

You may already be aware of the LT rated BFG AT TOs, but if not here is a link.

http://www.bfgoodrichtires.com/assets/pdf/all_terrain_ta_kd.pdf

My Pirelli Scorpion ATR's are also LT rated, though I don't know if the more "standard" Element-sized Scorpions are. The noticeable differences are that my tire is a Load Range C (most passenger car tires are B), and that they have a three-ply sidewall construction, allowing far higher load capacity than an Element could ever dream of carrying. :D

Well,
The other day I have to take a couple of girls to their houses....They were 9 girls plus my self . I did not find any lost of power or anything wrong..

Unless your E has 10 seat belts, you probably shouldn't advertise that.

... or maybe it was a joke.

Hi,


I've been reading these threads on the load capacity with some interest. I'm also shopping for an E. What I haven't seen discussed is what limits the load capacity? Is it the frame? The struts and shocks? The rear axle? I guess my point is, are there any mods or upgrades out there in the aftermarket to upgrade the weight capacity of the vehicle?


Thanks,


Michael

What I haven't seen discussed is what limits the load capacity?

There has been a lot of discussion about what limits the load capacity. The conclusion is that we don't really know. Honda has given use those numbers, but has not told us how they derived them.

paulj

If I'm in the Element with my partner, we're :sad: at least 600 pounds. Add to that my camera bag and a few water bottles, and we're screwed!

Knew I should have picked the Ridgeline!

Im going to miss the towing capacity on our current pontiac aztek, vs the element, The aztek pulled my Ford festiva home like it wasnt there on a landscape trailer on a 100 mile trip when i bought it.

No matter what you think, Deathshead, an Element would look far better in your driveway than either an Aztek or a Festiva!!

The so-called poorly-thought-out load carrying capacity of the Element has been discussed fervently for nearly four years now. The "number" (most have agreed) was determined by Honda's legal department; not actual users.

If one's everyday load exceeded the maximum official capacity, an Element is probably a poor choice. For most actual owners, exceeding the official capacity is an infrequent, though perhaps common thing. 80% of us don't think about it anymore. The other 20% probably bought something else.

While it's obvious that the Element's interior volume could seem deceptive, Honda's advertising is no more deceptive than anyone else's. The primary ads that brag of capacity are for full-sized pickup trucks. I also suspect the plethora of 6+ capacity SUV's on the market these days would be over their load limits if each of those passengers brought so much as a toothbrush along. :-o

Whoever promised raising kids, dogs and concrete blocks was gonna be cheap, anyway? :rolleyes:

seriously, you all are worried way, way too much. do you always drive under the speed limit on the highway? change your oil every 2999 miles? floss three times a day?

personally, i've put over 30k miles (out of 70k total) on the element on long trips carrying up to about 1250 lbs of people and gear, and never had one problem. and that includes some trips on unpaved backroads and up in the mountains on logging roads. with stuff on the top rack, and hanging off the hitch, and the inside totally stuffed.

if you can't bring yourself to feel comfortable living slightly outside of what the honda lawyers decide that they need to say about the element to eliminate any chance of liablity, then you should go buy something that gets 12mpg. and make sure that you buy the extended warranty for that chevy, you'll need it!

When looking into the load capacity I found that the Honda website (Honda.com) has the towing capacity at 1500lbs, how does that relate to the cargo capacity?

Has anyone else noticed the low total weight limit on the Element. I was putting some air in my tires the other day so I looked at the sticker inside the driver's side door to see the psi specs. I noticed the other info on there saying that the combined weight of passengers and cargo shouldn't exceed 675 lbs. Are they kidding me! That means me and my 2 brothers can't ride together in my car, 3 people in a four passenger vehicle. Yeah we're a little bigger than your average American but still! After a little research I found that the average healthy American male should weight between 120-160 lbs. So I guess by those numbers 4 people should fit in the Element leaving a little room for luggage. But how many of you guys are under 160?

Sheit! I did a couple searches and couldn't find anything. Must've used the wrong keywords. I hate myself...

You mind giving me those links?

Yea they say that its like 675 total weight, but the element can hold a lot more than that. On a day to day basis I haul about 700 lbs of tools plus myself and sometimes somone else. Yea it slows it down a little but it still drives nice.

I am in teh process of moving from one apartment to another. I had a load in this morning that would probably weigh in about 700-800 pounds. It did accelerate a bit slower, but the E isn't a rocket off the line to begin with.

wow ..i didnt know that info
but it is always me and my wife in the E when we go out..
me...165 lbs..my wife...93..
still have 417 lbs to spare..
so we are good :D

I think I reached that limit yesterday. 3 guys weighing well over 200lbs + gear heading up to Big Bear.

Acceleraton was slower and going uphill used up more gas. Going downhill the Element handled the twisty road better than expected especially with the low-grip Goodyears. The vehicle felt more stable maybe because of the weight.

One major thing I noticed though was when I was parked on an incline, while backing out I didnt have any braking power! The pedal was literally on the floor to get the damn thing to stop. I should have left the engine idling longer to get the fluid pumped and circulated. Anyone else experience this?

Has anyone else noticed the low total weight limit on the Element. I was putting some air in my tires the other day so I looked at the sticker inside the driver's side door to see the psi specs. I noticed the other info on there saying that the combined weight of passengers and cargo shouldn't exceed 675 lbs. Are they kidding me! That means me and my 2 brothers can't ride together in my car, 3 people in a four passenger vehicle. Yeah we're a little bigger than your average American but still! After a little research I found that the average healthy American male should weight between 120-160 lbs. So I guess by those numbers 4 people should fit in the Element leaving a little room for luggage. But how many of you guys are under 160?


Tie your youngest brother to a light weight trailer (1500 lbs. towing capacity) and all will be OK.:wink:

G.J.

take out the backseats and spare and save 128 lbs. don't get awd on an EX and save another 137!

I think the logical solution (doh!) is to always carry more helium balloons in the back! It's much safer than the hydrogen ones anyway! :-o

One major thing I noticed though was when I was parked on an incline, while backing out I didnt have any braking power! The pedal was literally on the floor to get the damn thing to stop. I should have left the engine idling longer to get the fluid pumped and circulated. Anyone else experience this?

Brake fluid is not pumped or circulated and has nothing to do with idling.

Anyone know what's the limiting factor? Transmission? Suspension? Tires? I've long noticed that this number is awfully low.

If it's realistic, it's begging for a lawsuit if someone overloads the Element without realizing it (how many owners are aware of the low limit?) and something bad happens as a result.

^ Suspension/steering and brakes to be sure, but also CG. If you carry too much weight high up, swerve and tip over, Honda doesn't want to be liable.

Given how American law works, they'll be liable regardless. Just not as liable.

I have searched high and low but can't find a dedicated thread for this subject so here it goes.

Why in the world is the cargo capacity of the Element only 675 lbs?

The Honda Fit has a capacity of almost 900 lbs. What the heck is going on?

If there is a thread where this has already been discussed (as there probably is) please redirect me.

Here you go, Chris.

Multiple threads merged.

Thank you!

I searched with the terms "cargo capacity" and "weight limit" and didn't find any of the threads that I see here.

I guess I must have fat fingered my search criteria. :shock:

I never use the standard search, only the advanced, but even so haven't found a way to make the engine search for phrases only. For example if you search for "weight limit" you get every thread that contains either word, making for a potentially useless pile of choices. So I try to limit the search to a single, preferably unusual word (though sometimes it has to something as generic as "weight"), and often limit it to thread titles rather than post contents.

I found that searching google with the following format produces really good results:

<search terms> site:elementownersclub.com

That will return results only for this site. I find what I need almost instantly every time.

Thanks for the tip, Twi.

I found this in the 2010 owners manual. I don't recall seeing it in any earlier versions:

I found this in the 2010 owners manual. I don't recall seeing it in any earlier versions:

Thanks for the chart. :grin:

Is there an example #4 where there are 4 200lb men in the vehicle and a bone saw and 6 or 7 severed limbs laying outside the vehicle?

Seriously though. What I get from reading all of those posts are that this is a liability issue that Honda doesn't want to tackle.

Does anyone have an unofficial towing capacity that they are confident in?

EDIT

Nevermind

<towing capacity> site:elementownersclub.com :)

I'm taking this info over to the ROC. They'll appreciate it as much as I do. :)

Does anyone have an unofficial towing capacity that they are confident in?

ya Chris...
My pop up trailer, loaded, is about 2300 lbs....
we've pulled it pretty much all over the northeast, including thru the virgina's with no problems at all

I have towed well over 3000 lbs about 200 miles, but don't try this at home and unless you have extensive towing experience. I'm not responsible for the results if you do.

I confess to towing in the above mentioned range :lol: . No problems at all. I launch a boat that weighs in with the trailer around 2500lbs. A little strain at first when pulling the boat out of the water but not really a big deal.

My guess is with the higher center of gravity Honda lowers the weight limit so they are not responsible if someone flips it when they load something in that is top heavy and offset the balance.

I have exceeded the limit in many ways and have been trouble free. The shocks and struts are do for a replacement but I also have over 90k miles;-)

I would hazard a guess that at least part of the weight limit settings are due to the light weight of the vehicle. To handle more weight, you would need (at least in part) stiffer shocks, springs, and struts, but that would make the vehicle's ride uncomfortably harsh. But as much as we can speculate, the logic behind it is still a mystery...:?

I have (obviously) also gratuitously and flagrantly exceeded the weight limit in many and creative fashions (400+ pounds on the roof, 1000+ pounds of concrete patio tile in the back, 3000+ pounds towing, etc.) and have not seen any ill effects.

Bear in mind that when we were in Ohio a few years ago we got to speak with the designers and test engineers who all said they regularly exceed the weight limits with no worries. Again no I don't have it on tape or on paper, so try at your own risk. But if you do damage something, I expect pictures! :lol:

Very true. If you have ever driven an empty dodge cargo van (pre sprinter) you would know what stiff suspension on a light vehicle feels like but as soon as you load it up it rides much nicer.

Very true. If you have ever driven an empty dodge cargo van (pre sprinter) you would know what stiff suspension on a light vehicle feels like but as soon as you load it up it rides much nicer.

Same with a lot of older pickups. Rode like crap til you picked up a load of dirt! :lol:

Couple thousand pounds of cargo for a weekend and we need new struts - so yeah, I'd stick to the advertized limits.. :lol:

We've been pulling our trailer, pretty regularly for the past few years, and had to replace the struts last year, and the rears are due this year....but I'm pretty sure that has more to do with the 260,000 km, than the weight...

As to the design limits, and Honda's rating and specs....we we're in Ohio on the first tour, and asked the same questions, with the same answers. The design engineers have said that the capacity of the E is much higher than the stated specs...which leads me to believe that Corporate sets the limits, not the engineers. And they ain't saying why, and never will...

That being said, we've owned our 03 Element since new, and I know what it can, and can't do, and that's good enough for me.

That weight limit is far too cautious. I've loaded up my 2004 EX with 1800+ pounds of landscaping bricks and it does just fine (as long as I don't try to stop too quickly). I've even hauled topsoil for my raised gardens, maybe 1600lb at a time, and it's handled it well - No bottoming out, no major engine strain, no scary noises, no surprises. I wouldn't recommend doing it very often, but I noticed no ill effects other than really crappy mileage (from 21mpg to 14mpg).

I've never towed anything with my E, but I would bet that it can handle a small boat or a jet ski OK.

If you have ever driven an empty dodge cargo van you would know what stiff suspension on a light vehicle feels like...

I've known about the 675# weight limit for the year we've had our E.

Today I started researching the types of things I could do to improve the carrying capacity: (1) rear springs, (2) rear shocks, etc. I read through this entire 7-year combined thread to seek answers.

Bottom line? DON'T TRY. The E is just designed that way.

The few times I've had our AWD E at or close to the payload limit, the rear springs were squished down, lifting the front and making the car handle very sloppily on the Parkway at 75 mph. (It only takes an inch or so of attitude adjustment to make the E's underbody start to act like a wing.)

Also, the OEM brakes aren't designed for a heavier load -- in my experience, 675#, or 4 adults, is really about the most you'd want to throw against that braking system.

So the order of upgrades I would TRY would be (1) better brake pads at replacement time, (2) heavier duty shocks in the rear. Beyond those two items which you're going to be replacing anyways under a maintenance regime, there isn't much you can do.

Incidentally, this same E drove 750 miles with a kevlar canoe on top (Thule rack), and it handled like a dream. The whole issue here (in this thread) is mass/weight. There's just no good "fix" for the weight issue, on this generation of Elements.

I was just looking around at other car manufacturer sites and noticed that Dodge has 2000lbs towing limits for it's smallest cars (when properly equipped).

Just food for thought.

well element was originaly designed to hold 5 125lb asians and a nice cooler of beer thats where the weight limit came from.

but that aside the reasons behind its weight limit is the same as my old explorer i had when i was young. just a note. if you pack out your truck. dont try to do a normal U turn from a stop take it slow. it would prolly be diffrent in an element and break when you do 3 wheel motion with a drive wheel off the ground.

but yea 4.0 v6 +rwd +6 girls in the back seat and another 2 in the passenger seat makes for quite the imbalance when doing a U turn and being a 5spd with 285/50 15s instead of the stock 235/75s prolly just added to it but it was quick lol

well element was originaly designed to hold 5 125lb asians and a nice cooler of beer thats where the weight limit came from.

The Element was designed from the get-go in the US, by engineers who happened to be employed by Honda. Design specs were not predicated on carrying little asian people.

well element was originaly designed to hold 5 125lb asians and a nice cooler of beer thats where the weight limit came from.

but that aside the reasons behind its weight limit is the same as my old explorer i had when i was young. just a note. if you pack out your truck. dont try to do a normal U turn from a stop take it slow. it would prolly be diffrent in an element and break when you do 3 wheel motion with a drive wheel off the ground.

but yea 4.0 v6 +rwd +6 girls in the back seat and another 2 in the passenger seat makes for quite the imbalance when doing a U turn and being a 5spd with 285/50 15s instead of the stock 235/75s prolly just added to it but it was quick lol
Marksberg? is that you?
Or maybe one of your kids lives in NY???

ROFL
sorry...I couldn't resist...lol

I found this in the 2010 owners manual. I don't recall seeing it in any earlier versions:

I love how in the diagram, the more people that is added, the less luggage they include. I was extremely shocked to see the weight capacity though, that's one of those things that are easily overlooked because who stops to ask about that? You just assume a car can carry as much as it can fit. I RARELY have a car full of people but now i have to start picking the friends that I drive with. =) Whatever though, I won't hesitate to put 3 other passengers int he car. I'm still gonna do what I usually do. I have a warranty so if things start falling off, I'll just take it to the dealer.

I found this in the 2010 owners manual. I don't recall seeing it in any earlier versions:

And another thing, I love how the picture has 3 people weighing 150 pounds each. I don't think I know 3 people that weight 150 pounds.

I believe the weight limit is caused by the OEM tires weight limits not the car itself since if you add up all there values and subtract the car weight you get 675. So buy a set of upgrade tires with a higher weight rating and you should be good. I have put 1000-1100 lbs in my car and nothing happened it was slower than usual, but i added 1000lbs so thats to be expected

OEM tire load rating at max pressure is about 1700lb, x4 that is 6800 lb, well above the door sticker 4450 GVW (which includes the 675). If you do put an extra ton in the E, raise tire pressures close to the side max (cold)!

Having bought a used E... and it was the cleanest at that Dealers Lot....
So far have had the back struts and the right front strut replaced... only thing this dealers service (one I now use) can think of to cause this in a car that is under 30,000 miles.. is the previous person...way over loaded this E.

I agree, that the load weight carrying ability is way low.
Have been told by one of Honda's marketing weasels, the E was to be marketed to the Surfers and to carry a couple of young men and their surf boards. Before they started marketing towards the Dog owners. Couple of normal Americans, couple of big dogs and the E is over the limit. Silly on Honda's part.

Having bought a used E... and it was the cleanest at that Dealers Lot....
So far have had the back struts and the right front strut replaced... only thing this dealers service (one I now use) can think of to cause this in a car that is under 30,000 miles.. is the previous person...way over loaded this E.

I agree, that the load weight carrying ability is way low.
Have been told by one of Honda's marketing weasels, the E was to be marketed to the Surfers and to carry a couple of young men and their surf boards. Before they started marketing towards the Dog owners. Couple of normal Americans, couple of big dogs and the E is over the limit. Silly on Honda's part.
I wouldn't read too much into that...even normal wear and tear on a set of struts will cause them to 'go' after 7 years...and sitting can cause rubber seals to break down - they like to move, and stay lubricated...

For what it's worth, I was told my left rear shock was 'leaking' and needed to be replaced by a dealer wienie when I had less than 60k miles on it...4 years ago. But they wouldn't warranty it, and I can't find anything wrong with it - it still passes the bounce test - even had it checked when we replaced the front struts last year, and was told it's fine....(and we tow way over the 'posted' weight limit...)

They shouldn't go south on a two year old car, when I bought it..it had 26,000 miles on it. Basically that is way, way early to need new struts.
If this is normal, then Honda has a major problem in their design.

I was lucky in finding a good "honest" local dealer close to me. They replaced my back struts and the front right one with no issues. It was that bad.

But then again.. that big dealer in Portland.. I doubt they would of been honest about it and won't of done anything.

Only reason I haven't gone back to a Toyota, is because how honest that local dealer has been.
Makes me wish I bought the E from them, am quite sure I won't be having any of these problems.