Did you recently take on (or consider) a loan of 84 months or longer on a car purchase?
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
Options
Comments
Stephen
By the way, there are no complaints on the Aztek.
BMW sales increased 28% last year and GM's market share fell from 30% in 1999 to 29% in 2000.
My FAMILY'S SAFETY is way more important than saving money on a MINIVAN that's being redesigned in it's second year . Oh what did the X-5 Rate in the national insurance institute for highway safety ..# 1...... what did the Montana Minivan ( Aztek: same platform as the Montana) DEAD LAST.. Oh and I know you do not care, but resale on BMW's are very impressive. As for Astek's , they seem to be giving them away. As for your complaints against VW, I would rather have my family in a accident with a Passat than a Astek ..
So please do not attempt to compare a very polarizing, being redisigned, low resale value, with any BMW THERE IS NO COMPARISON
Oh when was the last time you could buy a X-5 for Invoice...watch closely...NEVER\
BMW has won more awards than there is time to print here, where as even EDMUNDS calls the Aztek "Pumba the Talking Pig"
Oh and for "I be the dog" I thought the goal of any business was to sell a product that would appeal to a majority of consumers, not to porlarize them ..OH I can see the board meeting at GM now..
"Hey guys let's spend millions of dollars on a vehicle that a few brave souls will buy and the He_L what the rest of the public think's. Who cares aobut profits or meeting our goals. What the heck if we have to change it's looks the second year of production (even that has not been done in 30 years) let's break new ground here..!"
Business 101 :: sell a product that a majority of people would like to own..Then meet your sales goals...Keep the style that same for a few years in order to keep profit up..!!
Well if the Aztek was a College project ,it would have FAILED>>>>>>>>..>!!!
There have been no ratings released on the Aztek. Where did you get the dead last ratings from? There is absolutely nothing from the Montana data that can be applied to the Aztek to determine safety or barrier data.
The AZTEK
1. Has clearly missed that sweet spot of public taste. There is no doubt we live in a plastic world where looks riegn suppreme. Guess what the AZTEK has a polarizing look. 19 year old kids and young at heart matrons love it.
But clearly it is not mainstream enough to capture the market share needed to be recognized as a "popular" success.
So I agree.......If it was a College Marketing Experiment it would have failed. But SOMEONE clearly took a chance that this styling would be liked. You know what it worked FOR SOME.
I love the Styling and others do to
2. As for the quality of the Vehicle. Well this is a new vehicle. It's parts fit and it 's form and quality finish is excellent. For this you cannot argue.
Call it a Montana if you like..........But of the owners I have talked to the vehicle is nothing short of adored.
3. As for my criticism of jmatero revolve around the thrashing of the vehicle with little or no first hand knowledge. I agree ......the vehicle has NOT SOLD like the PT Cruiser......Go drive that vehicle. See the absolute terrible interior quality. Poor fit and finish and ridiculous PRICE.
But that college experiment would be a success........But I sat in one and quite frankly have never sat in such a small tiny poorly finished vehicle. BUT IT SELLS WELL for DAIMLER.
Well what sells well is not often best......Have another BIG MAC. Best selling food product in North America.
LAST NOTE: I'll take two AZTEKS over 1 BMW x.5. In Canada the x.5 is TWICE the price.
And according to posts on this very BOARD........3 X the problems.
Thanks LB THE DOG...... Some Day all cars will look this way. LOL
Signed
An owner with real experiences
your AZTEK pal
Why are you here?
Perhaps I do not fully understand the purpose of the Edmunds board, so please fell free to educate me. I assumed that this was a place for current owners to relate experiences for people who (like me) are considering a purchase.
Topgn, why aren't you on the beemer board? Jmatero, wouldn't your rambling be more at home on the Montana board? Gonzo, surely there's a "whinemobile" or "sales figure wonk" board out there that's more your style?
I came here to find out, from people like kiss and lb, what my potential vehicle experience will be like. Not to hear from people who, often by their own admission, have never even driven one.
PS: Gonzo, you claim "goal of any business was to sell a product that would appeal to a majority of consumers, not to porlarize them." Please go to the back of the class. Products that pander to the middle FREQUENTLY fail. Yes, boring sells, but so does style. By your definition, "polarizing" designs (like the Mustang, Minivan, Corvette, Thunderbird, Beetle and Taurus) would never have been. Yeah, they'd also have skipped the VW Thing, the Edsel and the Rampage, but would we (or the car companies) be better off?
Basically, why would I want Wal-Mart when I can have Gucci? Especially when the cookie-cutter things cost MORE than the style-leader? Yes, I may not look like all the drones in my weird little car, but maybe that's the POINT! Go buy a camry or accord (both GREAT sellers that bore me to tears) and let the creative and interesting people among us have creative and interesting cars to match.
Shalom.
"No wonder the American car companies are getting their butts kicked. They deserve to be put out of business building stuff like that"
PS Nice try "last1"- the quote you attributed to me wasn't mine. You're quatified to be a GM quality engineer.
BTW, you didn't answer my question: WHY ARE YOU IN THIS ROOM SPEWING ABOUT A CAR YOU DON'T OWN? I'm much more interested in the (admittedly repetitious) posts by kiss; at least Kiss HAS ONE. If I want uninformed twaddle, I'll read an N'Sync gossip column... Hey, maybe THAT's where I've seen you post before!
Building a QUALITY PRODUCT that is reasonably priced. Should put one out of business.
HMMMMMMM building a $60K luxury vehicle with problems galore. Should keep you in business. Go read the x.5 board. Hear the littany of problems.
LAST 1 IN: Your potential purchase of the AZTEK will raise eyebrows. But I can assure you this. I have not spoke to one owner with a serious problem/minor problem.......or any problem.
So use the excess inventory to your advantage and drive a good deal.
By the way......this TRAIL BLAZER is seriously considering a second AZTEK. One Black....my current. And one WHITE.......Imagine that in one Driveway.......
it would Give Topgun/Matero/Gonzo........coronaries.
Signed your AZTEK pal
I appologize for my repeating. But I will probably remain this way till I have a problem with my dealer or my vehicle.
I'm traveling from Toronto Canada to Florida and back in 3 weeks..... I'm looking forward to this trip.......WHY?? For the drive ; ).........Not Mickey!!!
signed Your AZTEK pal
Many of you who do not like the Aztek have made your feelings clear about that. You do not have to repeat it constantly. Constructive criticism is perfectly fine, and discussions on the vehicle is what this discussion topic is for. Nonetheless, we do not want to see any personal attacks, or attacks on others persons' choices. So far things have been fairly okay in here, but some posts are borderline...please keep it civil or we may have to start removing them.
Thank you for your co-operation!
Drew
Host
Vans, SUVs, and Aftermarket and Accessories message boards
Kissfan1, great posts! Enjoy your frequent "everyday-reviews" based on first hand experience.
Instead we are continually side tracked by haters of the vehicle in general and GM in particular.
When I purchased the AZTEK i was very negative about the relative merits of AMERICAN auto makers. In fact I was vehemently opposed to buying an American vehicle.
So buying the AZTEK instead of the Sienna was a giant leap of faith. Perhaps my absolute surprise with GM , their Client Care.......and ultimately the Product I bought.
This has lead to my passion about posting .
MY OBJECTIVE FOR POSTING ON THIS BOARD IS TO REPORT :
1. Real performance of MY AZTEK. Both postive and negative.
2. Public reaction and comments about MY AZTEK. Both positive and negative.
Thank you Drew for keeping us on track......and the negative posters with little positive new information should ........perhaps post on the boards of vehicles they know about. (be it Passats, BMW's, Borgs or Subarus)
Signed your
AZTEK pal
I'm here to give first hand knowledge!!
Thx for your encouragement!! (I'll try not to be too repetitive)
Regards
Why can't one disagree with a car ? Why can't one defend their choice of buying/owing that car, too ? Both points should be allowed to state their case. To ask that each contributor *adds* value to their discourse is imo, a subtle way of censoring; this should be discouraged by all overs of free speech.
I do not like the Aztek, should I not be allowed to post on the Aztek board ? Kissfan1 has the right and freedom to come over to the Toyota Sequoia board and post anything he so chooses about the Seq... That is his right which no one should take away.
I just find it ironical that we advocate free speech but try to silence it from others who don't necessarily agree with us....
Let democracy reign and allow everyone to express themselves !
Drew and Steve I hope you are reading this...
Steve
Host
Vans, SUVs, and Aftermarket & Accessories message boards
Hope this clarifies things for everyone.
Drew
Host
Vans, SUVs, and Aftermarket and Accessories message boards
Drew
Host
Vans, SUVs, and Aftermarket and Accessories message boards
It's unfortunate that a few like "topgn" have spoiled this forum for everyone else. They keep bashing Aztek over and over. I think these people have a lot of time on their hands.
While I don't like Aztek much, I do want the level of discussion to be a little more mature. Probably too much to ask though.
We are not trying to silence anyone.......however we know that contributors like Matero, Topgun, Gonzo. Do not like this vehicle. We know you do not like GM. We know the vehicle is not selling to the levels GM planned. All good info.
But there are many merits to the vehicle that owners enjoy sharing on this forum and prespective buyers are interested in hearing. Without first hand knowledge you cannot comment on the merits of the vehicle on a daily basis.
As for my freedom of speech to go on the Sequioia line.
1. I am not an owner. Have no interest in the vehicle.......and would no sooner think of going on that page then jumping off a bridge.
2. Why the detractors keep wasting their time here is beyond me.
I own the Aztek......I'm here to discuss the AZTEK with openminded souls like DINDAK who evaluate fairly.
Cheers for more "honest" debate not driven by alterior motives.
Your AZTEK pal
I'm fascinated by the Aztek as a case study summing up everything that's wrong with GM.
Ancient mechanical parts wrapped in an unattractive shell laughed at by 95% of the public.
GM decided to make a short 4 door van copying the basic style of the failed first generation Honda Odyssey and Mazda MPV. They hardly sold either.
It's like GM said "Let's take a failed design but slather it in ribs, gills, scoops and flares- then it will sell"--WRONG!
Poor market research brought GM a vehicle which will be lucky to hit 25-30% of it's sales goal. And a good portion of those will have been forced on rental companies.
The trickle of rebates will soon turn into a flood when the new, less offensive, ones near production. Many have been sitting on dealers lots for 7+ months now.
Everyone mocks this poor van. Name one other vehicle which has been the subject of such public ridicule. It's taunted by Jay Leno, David Letterman, even the "Survivor" guy, Richard, who won one, has made fun of it.
If you have one and like it, good for you. I hope you didn't pay too much. If you want one be patient I'll bet they will be giving $5000+ off soon.
As far as it's buyers being avant-garde- why such thin skin?
Good for you.
But you still add nothing to the debate and you would be better served in a room with the other owners of the Borg.
No thin skin.......just looking for usefull information. Of which you cannot provide. Your second hand comments with little backround are of little use.
Bye!!.........
First, let me tell you all what I honestly think of the Aztek. I think it will prove to be a reliable vehicle. The 3.4L V6 has a great reputation. The transmission mated to this engine is NOT the excellent 4-speed mated to the 3800 engine and has a reputation for being "troublesome" but not more so than the average Tranny from DC and Ford. The fact of the matter is GM (some would argue this...) builds the best automatic transmissions in the business... at the very least, the best of the big 3. The platform has been around in the US since 1997 and THAT is my biggest "negative" issue... because from all accounts it is one of the most un-safe on the road. This is not opinion... this if fact. You can look at the following 3 links to get detailed crash data:
NHTSA: http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/ncap/cars/1566.html
European Crash Data: http://www.euroncap.com/details.php3?id=vauxhall_opel_sintra_1998
Insurance Institute: http://www.hwysafety.org/vehicle_ratings/ce/html/96026.htm
All three agencies use different testing methods. The NHTSA and Euro agencies do front direct barrier testing and side impact testing while the Insurance institute utilizes an "off-set" front crash test which they feel better represents the average frontal collision model. In all three cases, the results were less than stellar. The offset produced the worst results. The Aztek/Montana platform was actually designed by GM's European OPEL division and was introduced there as the "Sintra" minivan in 1996. This model was tested in Europe in 1998 and the vehicle was pulled from the market shortly after those test results were published. GM says it was just a coincidence, but it must be noted that during the crash, the steering wheel actually separated from the steering column and decapitated the crash-test dummy. You form your own opinion.
The Pontiac Aztek uses the same platform as the Montana/Venture/Sillouette/Sintra and while there are differences, of course, I cannot and WILL NOT recommend this vehicle to family/friends/anyone transporting children until official U.S. test results are announced in a few weeks. As many readers of this board know, a year ago my neighbor and his grandson were riding in a new Olds Sillouette (same as Pontiac Montana) and hit a vehicle broadside (an elderly woman ran a stop sign). The impact was estimated to be at about 45mph and despite both airbags going off, my neighbor was killed (fatal neck/chest injuries) and his grandson in the passenger seat lost a limb. In that case, (as in the Insurance institute AND Euro tests) the front doors of the vehicle were not functional after the crash. For comparison, I suggest you all compare the Toyota Sienna's crash picture: http://www.hwysafety.org/vehicle_ratings/ce/photos/97026_2_16.jpg
to the Pontiac Montana's crash picture: http://www.hwysafety.org/vehicle_ratings/ce/photos/96026_2_21.jpg
These vehicles are of similar weight and dimensions yet both front doors on the Toyota not only opened, but were undamaged and could be bolted on a new vehicle without incident. In addition, the dashboard remained bolted to the firewall while in the Montana, the dash was pushed back into the drivers seat.
I happen to like the Aztek... for what it does.. it appears to be a usefull minivan alternative. As for styling, I'm a designer myself and I don't find the vehicle's lines "pleasing to the eye" but that's MY opinion... and beauty is in the eye of the beholder. I also find the price of the vehicle 10-20% overpriced... ecspecially when you consider what Buick is selling the larger 7-passenger Rondevous for... and what it comes with standard vs. the Pontiac. Other than that, I have NEVER said anything bad about this vehicle. In fact if people like KissFan would go back and search my posts, I've actually defended it from the start.
BUT, considering the crash-worthiness of it's stablemates, again, if you transport children PARTICULARLY... I would wait until we learn more about the safety of this vehicle before purchasing. It is due VERY SOON and there will be no shortage of these vehicles based on the numbers on the lots in the NY/CT/NJ area alone.
Thanks and I hope you all find this info informative.
Funny, we don't seem to have this problems over at the Subaru Crew...sorry, I had to plug this great group. :-)
Stephen
gonzo = topgn ??
It was a horrible accident and I was the first on the scene. The driver, an older gentleman driving a Honda Accord literally died while I held his hand . My daughter was fifty yards away. It was an experience that is etched in my consciousness forever.
I'm not sure it's relevance but it affected me deeply.
When choosing a vehicle you would think safety would have been my Prime concern.
Since the AZTEK has not been tested yet We can not know for sure what the official data will be. The AZTEK is built with a modified Montana Frame and is estimated to perform better then the Montana due to enhanced strength of the frame. This is speculation until all the results are in.
Safety was not my Prime concern and I pray to god that will not cost me. Until then I can only drive as safely as possible. Once the DATA is in we can truly discuss the relative safety merits of the AZTEK. Untill then all is speculation.
As far as Pricing......I expect that that is one of the reasons for poor sales and the pricing is being corrected as we speak. Witness my rebate. Which I may add is something that GM did not have to do. They have garnered a potential repeat customer.
Thank you Matero for this informative post with associated sites. I have bookmarked them and will watch for results of the testing. Until these results are in the safety component is an issue "up in the air".
Thanks.....for the productive post.
PLEASE NOTE: THE VEHICLE tested WAS A 1997.....TRANSPORT. Significant improvements have been made:
Side airbags designed to protect drivers' and front passengers' chests are standard in 1998 and later models. Beginning with 2001 models, the driver's side airbag also protects the head. Beginning with1998 models, front shoulder belts include crash tensioners to prevent slack from allowing excessive forward movement in a crash. Antilock brakes and daytime running lights are standard. Built-in child restraints are optional in Venture models, 1997-2000 Trans Sport and Montana models, and 1997-1999 Silhouette models
In addition further improvements made on the AZTEK........we must wait for test results. Anything else is poor speculation.
Signed your AZTEK pal
The Aztek is beginning to grow on me. I sat inside one, and it is very comfortable, especially given that I am 6'2". The Aztek has a lot of really neat features as well.
If I could afford the price, I would give the Aztek serious consideration.
Regards,
Keith
This is the page for the Toyota Sienna
Front Occupant Side Impact: 4 STARS
Rear Occupant Side Impact: 5 STARS
This is the page for the ONLY current AZTEK testing
http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/cars/testing/NCAP/ncap.cfm
Front Occupant Side Impact: 5 STARS
Rear Occupant Side Impact: 3 STARS
This is most accurate testing available for the PONTIAC AZTEK:
The AZTEK beats the Sienna for Front testing and loses to the SIENNA for rear. Furthermore if you would like to view test results for the 2001 Montana (not the 1997 Transport). Please visit this site : http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/cars/testing/NCAP/ncap.cfm.
You will clearly see the 2001 Montana performed very well.
I do agree with Matero about the 1997 Transport. Very poor results.
Thanks for the info Mr. Matero......you have given me the tools to feel even better about my purchase and have allowed me to post this info for other potential buyers.
I await the further testing later this month.
Your AZTEK pal
But I'll tell you go into a dealer and drive your bargain......You may be surprised at the pricing you get for the "safe" nicely appointed AZTEK.
My black one may be complimented by a leased white one. I wish yellow was available.
By the way..... Sit in one.....Drive One....get a good price you'll own one.
Your AZTEK pal
do not work, and the glove compartment latch needs to be replaced.
I remain convinced, that the Aztek is an exceptional American car. As such it should be
compared with other American cars. Please stop comparing it to German or Japanese cars, its
not fair to the Aztek. If you have ever owned a Toyota or BMW than this statement needs no
further explanation.
I think jmatero has alot to add to this forum and I appreciate his contributions. In fact,
he now has me concerned about the safety of the Aztek. However, it is unfair to predict the
safety of the Aztek based on the Montana crash ratings. When a manufacturer says a car shares
a platform with another design, that rarely means anything. A Lexus RX300 shares a platform
with the Toyota Camary. What ever that means? The thing that makes all mini vans less
resilient in a crash are sliding doors. These huge cut outs in an otherwise solid safety
cage are a real problem. The Aztek has four passenger doors, not two barn yard sliders.
This makes for a much more rigid structure. You would think it would do better than any mini van
in a crash tests. However, according to the NHTSA side passenger impact test, the Aztek
got a lower rating for the rear passenger than even the Montana. Not a good sign.
http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/ncap/ncap.cfm
If this turns out to be unsafe, than I trading cars with my wife, and she can drive the kids
around in my bimmer which by contrast is the safest car on the road.
Safer than a Volvo.
http://www.hwysafety.org/vehicle_ratings/ce/html/00006.htm
The comparison that he discusses is to the 1997 Transport........ not the 2001 Montana.
See my previous post.
The AZTEK delivers 5 STARS for Front Side Impact .
This means that there is 10 % chance of serious injury
The AZTEK delivers 3 STARS for Rear Side Impact
This means 21%-35% chance of serious injury.
Now these are important numbers. An important question is what other vehicles deliver 3 Stars for Side Rear Impact:
Toyota Camry
Toyota Corolla
Mazda 626
Nissan Altima
Volkswagen Beetle
These are generally considered well engineered solid vehicles and all of which the AZTEK ties for Rear Impact. In addition these are huge sellers for their manufacturers.......all tied with the AZTEK.
For FRONT side impact the AZTEK steps to the front of the class with an outstanding 5 Star Rating.
Your AZTEK pal
PS: see the complete comparison page at this address http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/cars/testing/NCAP/ncap.cfm
At this stage with the available data I can clearly recomment the AZTEK as a safe vehicle. Should the AZTEK perform to 2001 Montana for front testing this issue may be put to rest. Sad to say but if the individual that died in the Honda and Matero's nieghbor had been in a 2001 Montana......perhaps the sad result may have been different.
Thx Matero once again.
Another important thing to consider here is that just because the Montana platform's performance in crash tests (off-set in particular) is quite bad, this does NOT mean the Aztek will perform the same way. Here are two cases to consider: The 2000 Dodge Neon by all accounts is not a car I would want anyone in my family driving. The PT Cruiser uses the same platform/underpinnings as the Neon but has a different body and strengthened chasis. Also, the hood is MUCH longer than the neon's. Yet, its performance is just as bad. However... The 2000 Dodge Stratus, a design dating to 1995, performed even WORSE than the neon... yet, the 2001 model, using the same platform was just rated 5-stars by the NHTSA for frontal crash safety. This is because DaimlerChrysler found the biggest complaint about the old models was that they were perceived (and rightfully so) to be unsafe. From what I read, stainless steel was used to strengthen the a-pillars and the improved rating is the result.
I sincerely hope GM made enough improvements to the Aztek's body to improve crash ratings. For those of you who have driven the Montana, I can tell you the Aztek "seems" to be MUCH tighter a vehicle on all fronts. Fortunately, it did quite well in front side impact protection for the driver. Not so well for the rear passengers however. Regardless, I am awaiting results from BOTH the NHTSA AND the Insurance Institute because you really have to look at both to make an educated decision regarding safety. After all, as KissFan pointed out, the driver of the Montana fared better than the Sienna in the gov't crash tests (head-on center) but, the insurance institute's results (off-set...more "real-world" situation) produced THESE results:
Toyota:
http://www.hwysafety.org/vehicle_ratings/ce/photos/97026_2_16.jpg
Pontiac: http://www.hwysafety.org/vehicle_ratings/ce/photos/96026_2_21.jpg
Which drivers seat would YOU rather be sitting in?
I'll post links to the results as soon as they are available.
Those controls on the steering wheel. You are fight .....I'll never own a vehicle without them. Much safer.
Thanks for your encouragement. Review some of the SAFETY info. Thanks to Matero I've been able to confirm the safety benefits of the AZTEK.
The story only gets better.
signed your AZTEK pal
The test was done on the 1997 Pontiac Transport. Not the 2001 Montana.
The 2001 Montana delivers 4 Star rating in comprehensive tests.
The insurance instiute does not test as frequently or as throughly. The NHTSA is far more comprhensive and test yearly.
After having elevated the conversation please do not manipulate the data to fit any bias.
For FRONT testing we must wait......or use the 2001 Pontiac Montana which results are extremely comprhensive and are a testament to overall structural integrity.
your AZTEK pal
Not terribly relevant because I do not care about the Passat. But the testing proves the AZTEK is safer in Driver side impact. (cuts both ways......doesn't it)
Since I'm alone 90% of the time in the vehicle(bet you are alone too 90% of the time)......and I am the primary bread winner (as you may be).......I honesty could not recommend the PASSAT as being as safe as the AZTEK for Front side impact.
The other data not available.
Sorry!!
All the very best.......Thx for the info.
your AZTEK pal
PS: side rear impact of Passat only marginally better then the AZTEK
Stephen
I would like to test drive one, because I heard from many sources that the Aztek is a GREAT handler. I will definitely look into the Aztek, as it is a great multipurpose.
I too live in Toronto, so I figure that the Aztek will be great, especially during the winter months.
Once again, thanks for the tips.
Regards,
Keith
That isn't a shot at the vehicle itself as much as it is the company that thought it was a good idea in the first place. To have something go into popular culture as an object of scorn almost immediately is quite unique.
Those of you that have them, I hope you enjoy them. You are about the rarest of breeds, I would imagine.
Constructive criticism for kissfan: the number of posts and in particular your use of CAPS inserted throughout gives the reader the impression you are trying to shout down all others. Perhaps a more moderate approach would be helpful to avoid the risk of war.
2017 Cadillac ATS Performance Premium 3.6
Oddly enough, the rear side impact rating of the 2001 models is lower than the 2000 models. I can't explain that. Could just be chance... but strange none-the-less
If you are interested in learning about this vehicle you will read these posts.
If you are not interested in the vehicle and are more interested in laughing at GM for this apparent failure then your posts add little value.
We know about the looks.......we know about the sales! Tell us something NEW ; )
your AZTEK pal
PS : Matero......nothing rated higher then AZTEK/Montana in Front Side impact (5% or less chance of serious injury)
http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/ncap/cars/2001Vans.html = MONTANA
http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/ncap/cars/2001SUVs.html = AZTEK
I think we can agree that the safety arguement is moot till front testing becomes available. As of now for the 2001 test data the AZTEK remains a safe vehicle.
We must ignore the insurance testing of the 1997 Transport as not being relevant.
It must be NOTED that spreading false information about the SAFETY worthiness of this vehicle is a serious transgression that could discourage a potential interested AZTEK purchaser.
I've taken the time to go through all the relevant sites on all current testing ONCE AGAIN:
FRONT SIDE IMPACT AZTEK: 5 STAR RATING (5% or less chance of serious injury) NONE BETTER
FRONT REAR SIDE IMPACT AZTEK: 3 STAR RATING (11-20 % chance of serious injury)
This rating is the same as the following vehicles:
Toyota Camry
Toyota Corolla
Mazda 626
Nissan Altima
Volkswagen Beetle
These are generally considered well engineered solid vehicles and all of which the AZTEK ties for Rear Impact. In
addition these are huge sellers for their manufacturers.......all tied with the AZTEK.
Personally, in a side impact, I prefer my child in the back seat of a Passat (4-stars NOT including the Air Curtain) than to an Aztek (3-stars... NO rear side airbags OR air curtain).
Now Back to the Aztek. It is VERY important to note that the star rating is designed to be a rating in relation to other cars in a particular vehicle's own class. In other words, Your Aztek gets a 5-Star front side impact rating if it is hit by either ANOTHER AZTEK or ANOTHER MINIVAN WEIGHING THE SAME AS YOUR AZTEK. In other words, you can't compare star results of a family car to star results of a minivan like the Aztek. For instance, if a Dodge Ram hits the side of your Aztek, you would not get 5/3 star protection.
Next, any implication that the NHTSA testing is "More complete" than the IIHS or EuroNcap is without merrit. I IMPLORE readers to disregard that statement. That is merely KissFan's OPINION. The facts: The NHTSA performs 2 tests: An impact head-on into a fixed flat surface, And a sled impact into the B-pillar for side impact protection results.
The IIHS (Insurance Institute for Highway Safety) performs two different tests. Their tests are designed to show more "real-world" performance. In other words, few people hit walls at 45mph head-on. Insurance company data has shown that most people attempt to "steer away" from collisions, hence the institute crashes their cars "off-set". The testing also includes rolling the vehicle into fixed posts at 5mph to test front and rear bumper performance. This is important because it is the most common collision type reported to insurance companies and you'll find some interesting results... for instance, the new Hyundai Elantra got a 5-star bumper rating.. meaning there was little damage AT ALL to the bumper, while the 2001 Lexus LS Series (a car 4 times the price of the Hyundai) required expensive repairs which included replacement of the headlamps and trunk-lid.
And finally, the EuroNcap testing includes: an offset frontal test at 40mph, 30mph Side impact into the B-pillar using a specialized dummy that collects Head, neck, torso AND limb stresses, a 25mph Pedestrian impact test (yes, they rate the danger to a person hit by a particular car), and finally a Head Protection impact test which crashes a pole into the drivers door to test air curtain driver head protection.
That said, it is obvious that the NHTSA has the LEAST "comprehensive and thorough" testing of the bunch. That said, I (and most auto safety specialists) advise safety concious buyers to take both the NHTSA AND IIHS ratings into account when making a decision. That being the case, KissFan's comment "I've been able to confirm the safety benefits of the AZTEK... The story only gets better." suggests he has concluded the Aztek is Safe based on the one result available to date. This does NOT provide enough data to make such a conclusion. It merely indicates that a Gov't agency has concluded the Front passenger gets a 5-star side impact and the rear a 3-star.
We have no other data on the Aztek at this time... only info. on the Montana. KissFan also goes out of his way to suggest the Montana (the Aztek's stablemate) got a higher rating from the NHTSA than the Toyota Sienna. Apparently he didn't take this into account... the official report from the IIHS:
"MONTANA OVERALL EVALUATION: POOR Massive occupant compartment deformation contributed to dummy measures indicating the likelihood of significant injury to the neck and both legs in the frontal offset crash test. Side airbags with driver head protection, belt crash tensioners, and daytime running lights are pluses.
MONTANA STRUCTURE/SAFETY CAGE: POOR There was major intrusion into the driver footwell area and major rearward movement of the instrument panel plus too much vertical movement of the steering wheel. Floor buckling tilted the driver seat forward.
MONTANA RESTRAINTS/DUMMY KINEMATICS: MARGINAL After moving forward into the airbag, the dummy's head and neck were snapped rearward as the steering column intruded. Then the dummy's head was struck from behind by the seatback and head restraint as they tilted forward because of floor buckling. The seat continued moving forward and pushed down on top of the dummy's head, bending its neck back even farther.
INJURY MEASURES: HEAD/NECK, LEFT & RIGHT LEGS POOR A very high neck extension moment occurred, indicating the likelihood of significant neck injury. Left and right lower tibia indices were high, indicating the likelihood of significant injury to both lower legs. The forces on the left lower leg were so high that the dummy's metal foot broke off from its leg at the ankle."
OR this report from EuroCap:
"The Sintra (Montana) was overwhelmed in the frontal impact: the steering wheel and the deployed airbag broke off its column and the driver faced a real threat of fatal neck injury because his head was forced back and upwards. Opel has says it has now taken steps to prevent the wheel from snapping off, but the changes have not been tested by Euro NCAP. The car was awarded three stars, mostly for its performance in the side impact, but the final star has been struck through to indicate NCAP's fears over the chance of a fatal injury. Opel has announced that the Sintra is being withdrawn from sale, but this news came after Euro NCAP had tested the car; in any case, new examples will continue to sell for some time. Finally, its child restraints performed well in the front impact but poorly in the side impact."
and MORE importantly, the pictures of a Crashed Sienna vs a crashed Montana To conclude ANY vehicle is "safe" based on the NHTSA alone would be inaccurate. True, while no crash test can accurately show REAL testing results, the
The Sintra was not put out to pasture because of safety issues. It did not sell well in Europe mostly because of size. It was more of a stop gap effort until the Zafira was ready for market. Since the Zafira started production it has become extremely popular. It has gone into production in other markets including Thailand. The biggest difference is the width of the vehicle. The Sintra was too wide for Euro roads. That's one of the reasons why the Zafira is not coming to the states, it's too narrow for American tastes. It really is a sharp package but we Americans are (no polite way of putting it) lard asses.
I do not think it is fair to label the Aztek as unsafe because of tests on a distantly related vehicle. If one Ford is "dangerous" are all of them? To repeat a claim that is unverified is unfair to those who own or are considering this vehicle. To label something dangerous until proven otherwise.... well that must only apply to Azteks.
Steve
Host
Vans, SUVs, and Aftermarket & Accessories message boards
To conclude ANY vehicle is "safe" based on the NHTSA alone would be inaccurate. True, NO crash test can accurately reproduce what happens in an actual crash (all crashes are different). BUT that only STRENGTHENS the argument that we need results from ALL crash tests to make educated decisions.
Look, I mentioned I drove a Passat ONE TIME and YOU (KissFan) have brought it up now 4 or 5 times. This is an Aztek forum. Aztek info please. I have NO regrets with my purchase. If others show me real data to suggest my car is unsafe, I'll thank them for the info. I WON'T attack them and suggest THEIR car is "worse". That's just childish. Lets stick to the topic and we'll touch base on this when the results become available.
You continue to refer to the Insurance test of a 1997 Transport. That is no comparison.
The comparison of the Passat is an apples to apples comparison of the same testing.
An AZTEK being hit ny an AZTEK vs a Passat being hit by a Passat.
Simple.......AZTEK = 5 Star Side Impast Rating
PASSAT = 4 Star side Impact Rating
This is not an attack it is a statement of irrefuteable impirical mathematic fact.
1. The European test.......are irrelevant . The do not TEST the AZTEK. Period.
2. The Insurance Test is irrelevant because they test the 1997 Pontiac Transport.
There is only one test that is valid and that is the test that you were KIND enough to point me to. THE NHTSA.
I recall your post about not being able in good conscience to recommend the AZTEK as a safe vehicle because your neighbor died as a result of a frontal side impact.
You drew a parellel between the AZTEK and the Olds Silouette. Which is simply not valid.
On the ONLY EMPIRACAL evidence available to us about the AZTEK we clearly see:
5 Star Frontal Side
3 Star Frontal Rear These score beat or exceed that of other vehicles it's class.
Remember.........you cannot use tests on 1997 Transports.....or European tests on the Sintra. That is simply a distortion of the TRUTH!!
YES THE OFFSET TESTS ARE FORTHCOMING. We must wait.
Case closed.
I'm saddened that your friend and neighbor was killed in a horrible tragic accident in a GM vehicle. But please do not colour IMPIRACAL evidence of tests measuring over 500 impact measurements that generate a 5 STAR rating.
I would go so far as requesting the HOST to strike any misleading posts that are designed to prop up a biased analysis.
When my wife saw the pictures you posted she was almost in tears thinking that the AZTEK was unsafe. IT IS ONLY when I painstakingly went through your allegations that I was able to console her that based on the evidence the AZTEK is safe vehicle.... We await further testing.
My regards........but I will NOT be hood winked. I will research all allegations. The fact needs to be impecable or the TRUTH will be uncovered.
Deliberately MISLEADING;
Your picture is of a 1997 Transport.......Not a 2001 AZTEK.
AZTEK = 5 STAR SIDE IMPACT FRONTAL
SIENNA = 4 STAR SIDE IMPACT FRONTAL
Do not lead potential consumers or owners.
Based on your post JUAN was going to change his driving habit when the AZTEK is as safe as the CAMRY.
You cannot do that........and get away with it.
They did not test the MONTANA.
They tested the 1997 Pontiac Transport......and made sweeping generalizations as Insurance Companies do.
For PAINSTAKING testing the NHTSA tested the 2001 Montana & the 2001 AZTEK.
Again .......you intentional mislead.
I drive this VEHICLE daily. I care about the safety.........I checked it throughly.
You drive another vehicle and your comparisons are simply not accurate.