By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our
Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our
Visitor Agreement.
Comments
To me this is a Highlander with a 3rd row seat and a little more power. Just another overated Import that too many idiots are willing to spend way too much money on.
"To me this is a Highlander with a 3rd row seat and a little more power. Just another overated Import that too many idiots are willing to spend way too much money on."
Actually, the Pilot has slightly more cargo room behind the second row seat than the Aztek. And the Aztek has slightly more cargo room with all seats folded than the Pilot.
One thing Motor Trend isn't going to look at well enough is safety. Here are the IIHS crash test results for the Aztek:
http://www.iihs.org/vehicle_ratings/ce/html/0114.htm
Here's the NHTSA test:
http://www.nhtsa.gov/NCAP/Cars/1894.html
Granted that not everyone believes in crash tests (they're usually the ones with vehicles that didn't do well)! The Pilot will likely get the 5-star and the IIHS 'good', possibly a best pick.
But for the folks that do believe in the crash tests, well, is the "idiot" the one who paid more, or the one who is putting their family at significantly greater risk?
Jen
"MARGINAL The driver space was maintained reasonably well in the frontal offset crash test, but the airbag deployed late and dummy measures indicate the possibility of head injury. Side airbags (with head protection for the driver), new-design child restraint anchorages, and daytime running lights are pluses."
Besides with a better slalom speed, shorter stopping distance, and a better rollover rating you'll have a better chance of avoiding accidents altogether. Which in my mind is more important anyway.
rms41: why don't you check out the safety ratings on my car. I'm not knocking SUV's, I'm not even knocking the Pilot, I'm knocking the journalists obvious partiality to Import vehicles.
jbachner@carolina.rr.com
However, the Pilot is likely to earn top scores. Why? Because Honda said so. They do internal testing and are thus sure that the vehicle will do well. Honda announced before the MDX was released that it would earn top scores, and it did.
The Pilot is, as we all know, pretty much the same as the MDX when it comes to structure, so it's highly likely the Pilot will match the MDX's crash test performance (unless Honda pulls out some members, but given their promise, unlikely).
You don't see Pontiac/GM saying that the vehicle will do well, because they either haven't done the internal testing, or they have and know it won't do well.
2) Even without the late-firing airbag, I wouldn't categorize the Aztek as doing well in the IIHS crash test. It would do no better than "acceptable" like the Rendezvous did. Note that it only scored an "acceptable" for the structure/safety cage. "Reasonably well" just means "acceptable" and not "good".
That might be adequate for some, but given that there are so many mid-sized SUV's with "good" and best pick scores, no, I don't think the Aztek does well.
And the airbag didn't seem to be an issue in the NHTSA test where it got just 3 stars for the passenger. That has to do with the structure that IIHS pointed out -- the steering column goes up, the floor buckles, the seat tilts, etc. because of the vehicle's inability to hold the structure all together.
Yes, avoiding a collision is important too, and Honda should think about adding stability control to help the Pilot, which may have the same tail-happiness that the MDX can have in extreme conditions.
3) The rollover resistance rating is highly controversial and not the result of a test per se. It's simply a measure of static stability and not vehicle dynamics.
The Aztek does do well for an SUV. The MDX also has the same star rating for the static rollover resistance (it's actually slightly ahead of the Aztek, but NHTSA doesn't give out fractions of stars ...). Unless the Pilot has dramatically altered the center of gravity, these should all have equal star ratings.
4) Your car (Oldsmobile Aurora) does do very well indeed in the offset frontal crash test. Congratulations! It does fairly well, but not great, in the full-frontal crash test, so please don't try to rear-end anyone. Its side impact rating is nothing special. Can't have everything!
http://www.autooninfo.net/BestandWorstof1997.htm
Look around on this site at the various categories. See which car makers build the most reliable vehicles. See which ones are consistently the worst.
2002 Chrysley LXi Fwd 4dr Minivan (3.8L 6cyl 4A) 60 3.9% $2500
2002 Eddie Bauer Expedition 4WD 4dr SUV (5.4L 8cyl 4A) 60 3.9% $2500
2002 Pontiac Aztek AWD 4dr SUV (3.4L 6cyl 4A) 36 1.9% $2000
2002 Chevy Trailblazer LT 4WD 4dr SUV (4.2L 6cyl 4A) 60 3.9% $1000
Not that these are all bad vehicles but retain no value whatsoever.
The Pilot has 100cubic feet of storage 10 cubic feet more than the aztek behind the first row of seats. That is actually 10 cubic feet more than my Trooper which is pretty darn big.
-mike
-mike
So the Aztek has slightly more cargo room behind the first row than the Pilot.
But the Pilot has slightly more cargo room behind the second row than the Aztek (48.7 vs. 45.4).
Where did you see 100 cubic feet behind the first row for the Pilot? I think your Trooper has more at 90.2 without the moonroof, 85.3 with the moonroof.
Every vehicle that Honda has claimed five star safety for has earned it. It started back in 1999 with the Ody (top rating in all tests), then the MDX, the redesigned Civic (tops in all tests), and the latest would be the CR-V. Each time one of these has been tested, it earns the safety ranking that Honda predicted. It's true that the fat lady hasn't sung, but with a perfect track record, I have no reason to doubt the claims.
-mike
Why? I suspect the answer isn't in the 3 cu.ft. difference in max volume. Both can handle a 4x8 sheet of plywood according to the review, and both have a 31" lift-over height. However, the Aztek requires you to remove and store the rear bench, while the Pilot's folds out of the way. Also the Pilot's gate lifts up and out of the way, while the Aztek has the lower clamshell half to contend with. Ease of operation would be my guess.
Agreed. For anyone who has to have proof, I would hold off on buying, and the tests will be out within 6-12 months. But I don't think there's any reason to doubt the claims.
That's what amazes me about manufacturers whose vehicles don't perform well. The methodology of the testing is well-known. As long as the manufacturer has the commitment to design their vehicles for safety, and to verify their designs through actual testing, they should do well in the tests. But a lot of manufacturers are cutting costs, skimping on design, and skimping on testing, and the penalty is crashworthiness.
There has also been some talk about raising the curve. It's inevitable that with better attention to safety, eventually everyone will get high marks and there'll be a new standard to set.
Today there are eight mid-sized SUV's that score a "Good" or better (better being "Best Pick," for which there are five). If one elects to follow the crash tests (and not everyone does), and the balance of the vehicle's safety measures are competitive, why settle for less?
Behind 3rd row: 16.3 cubic feet.
Behind 2nd row: 48.7 cubic feet.
Behind 1st row: 90.3 cubic feet.
One would have to assume that the seats are appropriately folded down for the capacities.
Anyway, not having one makes it tough to test all year round. That slows the design cycle (and adds costs).
Wink Martindale - "Hi folks, we're here to end the debate and scientifically prove that Pepsi tastes better than Coke. We've covered the labels of these two cola's and asked Ray Knucklehead to taste them and tell us which one tastes best...OK Ray, go for it."
Ray Knucklehead - "Hmmmm, pretty good."
Wink - "OK Ray, how about the other one?"
Ray - "Can I have a drink of water?"
Wink - "Huh?"
Ray - "You know, to clean my taste buds"
Wink - "Oh, uh, sure."
Ray - "That's better."
Ray - "Hmmmm, this is good too."
Wink - "So Ray, which is the best cola?"
Ray - "Well, it's pretty close, but I'll have to say the second one."
Wink - "The second one. OK Ray, remove the label."
Ray "Ah ha, it's the Pepsi!"
Wink - "So there you have it folks, the data is in! Pepsi tastes significantly better than Coke!"
Varmint: All the pictures I have seen show the NAV up top, and some have the radio up top w/out the NAV System? I am looking at wieck.com and the honda site.
Back to the Pilot. I recently placed an order for mine and it will arrive in early June. Only thing is - they cannot tell me the actual color - only that it should be green. The dealer says that it was model had a "gn" designation, but that could mean a lot of things. I envision the evergreen that they use on the Odyssey, but I have not heard it come up in any of the discussions here. The sagebrush will not be out until the summer, so I do not think that is what it is. Any thoughts?
Also, varmint, were the colors you saw (in your visit to the dealership) of the exact same palette as the Oddy or the MDX? Just curious...
You are probably correct in the evergreen thoughts.
Sandstone w/Saddle Fabric (August Release)
Sagebrush w/Fern Fabric (August Release)
Redrock Pearl w/Gray Fabric
Evergreen Pearl w/Saddle Fabric
Havasu Blue Pearl w/Gray Fabric
Taffeta White w/Fern Fabric
Starlight Silver w/Gray Fabric
Nighthawk Black Pearl w/Gray Fabric
Has anyone seen the sagebrush or Sandstone colors yet? Any dealers saying when they will at least receive some color chips?
Bottom line, Toyota and Honda have the Pilot and the Highlander. From what I've seen Neither are much better than the Aztek or the Rendevous, yet Honda and Toyota want to charge people thousands more. If I were buying my money wouldn't go to Honda or Toyota not when I have 2 alternatives that do as well or better and cost alot less.
Same with the BMW. It's tops on C&D's top ten list every year and they get ripped for doing so. However, if you've ever driven one, you would know why every other sports sedan manufacturer tries to copy it. It is the best and has been for ten years. Granted, other manufacturers are getting closer, but it is still the best.
The Japanses build solid, well crafted, ergonomically advanced, reliable cars with great histories of high resale values. The "big three" have much deeper rooted histories of poor quality, low resalve value and recalls up the ying-yang.
I know there is great debate out there about "buying American", but I have a hard time plopping down $30k+ for an American car/SUV that I know I'm going to have problems with in the next few years. People who have one without problems are the exception, not the norm. It's the exact opposite for the Honda / Toyota side.
Puppycarmen - The colors are listed in a post above. If the same name is used on the Ody or MDX, then it's the same color.
Sbcooke - I'll have to take another look. Every Pilot I've seen has the radio at the top of the dash. The climate control system is in the middle (kinda looks like a radio), but I believe the DVD and NAV have been below the radio.
-mike
http://www.usatoday.com/money/autos/2001-05-17-jdpower.htm I would measure quality by actual problems per vehicle not owner surveys. It seems Buick is right with Toyota and in 99' squarely beat just about everyone. They beat Honda, so did Cadillac, Saturn is near Honda in the rankings. It seems most Asian and other Japanese makes round out the bottom with Land Rover. That doesn't support your claim that the Japenese build great vehicles. It's funny the Japenese makes that are built here do far better than the ones built there. So in my mind American cars do fairly well.
That is hillarious. So you mean that if there is a problem like "tail light bulb bad" would count the same as "my tranny blew up" ?
-mike
Grand High Poobah
The Fraternal Order of Procrastinators
So yes, Buicks should hold up well, since rarely (if ever) are they ever pushed to their limit.
Bob
tidester
Host
SUVs
1999 Oldsmobile Aurora - original MSRP $36,899 - trade in TMV $14,434
1999 Honda Accord EX V6 - original MSRP $24,715 - trade in TMV $13,956
The Olds is only worth 39.1% of MSRP after 3 years whereas the Honda is worth 56.5%
Even if full MSRP was paid for the Honda and a $3000 discount was available for the Olds the Honda still wins easily. I'll bet the same will be true in 3 years comparing Rendezvous to Pilot.
Tidester, Pontiac spells Aztek with a "k" not a "c". Besides, I think I've made my point and we are comparing Buick now I believe.
Also if you are going to make a comparison between Honda and Buick Resale value maybe you should do it with a Buick. At the same time why don't you do it with a Buick that is in the same class as the Accord lets say a Le Sabre. Granted the Le Sabre comes to about $11k at trade in, and the Accord comes in at $12.7 with comparable equipment. Hardly a difference if you aske me....
'99 Buick Regal - 11347 TMV
'99 Accord EX V6 - 17713 TMV
'99 Buick Century - 9359 TMV
'99 Accord LX V6 - 14962 TMV
Where's the value retention in Buick?
To get this back on topic, history will show that the Rendevous and Aztec will not hod their value as well as the Pilot. Nor will they be as reliable.
Grand High Poobah
The Fraternal Order of Procrastinators
1999 Buick Century Limited - original MSRP $20,707 - trade in TMV $8,122
1999 Honda Accord EX V6 - original MSRP $24,715 - trade in TMV $13,956
The Buick is only worth 39.2% of MSRP after 3 years whereas the Honda is still worth 56.5%. So the Century doesn't really fare any better than the Aurora. If the Le Sabre does any better it's probably due to the fact that many Le Sabre drivers are retired and don't put many miles on.
I rest my case.
I hate to be cynical, but a few dozens posts ago, everybody (me included) was complaining about the impending dealer gouging. Now, everybody tries to convince gm_litig to buy a Honda. I say, the more buyers go for the Aztek, the less the demand for the Pilot, the less I'll have to pay for it. So, gm, if you like the Aztek, please go buy it. Furthermore, please spread the good word around, and get more buyers to switch from the Pilot.
Thanks in advance.
We'll have to wait and see how the Pilot sells, I still think the price is too high. I think the same thing about the Saturn VUE V6 also. Both are overpriced along with the Highlander.
Got any data to back that up? Take a look the vehicles it was desinged to compete with (Explorer, Durango, Pathfinder, Highlander, Trailblazer, etc.) and I think you'll find that MSRP is quite competitive. The only vehicles significantly cheaper than the Pilot are the mutants of the class; those which compete indirectly.
In the Car & Driver review they gave a size of 4'x6'4" vs. 4'x8'. It would be important if you were coming home from the Home Depot, since you'd have to have the hatch partially open.
Minivan's and perhaps some of the larger SUV's like the Suburban or Expedition, can handle 4x8 with the rear doors closed.
Also Varmint I made a correction in the Highlander vs. CRV vs. Aztek Topic. Thanks to the recent Motor Trend review I was able to get a more accurate perspective on the Performance of the 02' Aztek.