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 7/25 for details.
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/25 for details.
Options
Comments
Mass is not as important as ENERGY ABSORPTION!
Do you think an indy car weighs as much as your Aztek? Will you survive if your Aztek hits the wall at 100 mph?
I'll take a vehicle that properly manages energy absorption over a vehicle with higher mass any day.
Smash the Civic into a wall at 33mph and then do the same with a 1960 Buick. Even with seatbelts, you will die in the Buick.
Has anybody actually witnessed these tests? Or studied the aftermath and supporting data? We do sled tests everyday and it is not as simple as bigger=better.
Also maxintosh, you mention that SUVs are more prone to roll over, so I guess you can accept that the fact that the AZTEK has 4 star ratings in roll over test, better than ANY SUV out there, it is safer in that sense than any SUV out there. Ok I'm done, I was just getting tired of seeing a forum that was informative become a debate over if the Passport is a honda or not and if Mercedes had airbagas in the 80s, BIG DEAL, The Tucker had crumple zones back in the 40s!!!!
If a compact car collides with a bigger vehicle, the compact will be getting hit with alot more force. (due to the greater weight of the larger vehicle)
I don't want to be too picky ... but ... the vehicle forces are exactly equal! At least that's what Newton says - equal and opposite forces. Your conclusion, if not your premise, is correct however as the change in momentum is proportionately greater in a lighter vehicle.
An occupant of the smaller vehicle will be subjected to greater forces since his/her interaction with his/her own vehicle will be based on the vehicle's greater change in momentum.
It's a fine distinction but the result is the same.
tidester
Host
SUVs
I could not find any results for Audi A3's or A8's at NHTSA - but the A6 scored only "acceptable" in IIHS offset tests, including a rating of "marginal" for both legs/feet injury.
The A3 is not sold in this country, and the aforementioned A6 was redesigned for 2002 but has not been tested yet. In the much more strenuous Euro NCAP tests, however, the new 2002 A4 aced it.
If you feel safe in a compact car with the design attributes you listed - great! Go for it. Just remember that on average you're EIGHT times more likely to die than me, if my twice-as-heavy vehicle hits you. With all the features you listed, maybe it's only FOUR times. Kinetic energy is directly proportional to mass and the square of velocity.
Kinetic energy is only conserved in PERFECTLY ELASTIC collissions! A car crash is an inelastic collission (cars DEFORM). Much energy in a car crash is dissipated in the form of sound and heat. The more rigid structure of an SUV has a hard time absorbing energy and transfers more of the energy right to the occupants. If you hit a compact car, they're NOT eight times as likely to die.
F = ma
F1 = F2
m(aztek) * a(aztek) = m(civic) * a(civic)
a(civic) = [m(aztek) * a(aztek)] / m(civic)
m(civic) = 2,507 lbs
m(aztek) = 4,098 lbs (the Aztek is only 1.5 times heavier)
The mass of the A6 is 3,766 lbs!
I sincerely hope, at least, that you're driving such a beastly vehicle because you need the utility and not because it gives you this sense of security ("well, they'll die, but I'll be fine!"). IMHO, the Aztek looks like an angry kitchen appliance. Alas, beauty is in the eye of the beholder....
dindak - agree with you too - how can enfurio know this unless he has seen an actual crash and real fatal results, or obtained data of such a crash? Every crash is different.
maxintosh - unless you are qualified, I'd suggest you refrain from judging what load levels are "tolerable". Are you studying pre-med too? Take a look at the FAQ page on NHTSA's site. The front passenger of a Lexus RX300 has a 17% chance of femur fracture, while such chances are indistinguishable from 0% for all Aztek front occupants.
"Noggin-friendly" - Look at the absolute values in the NHTSA site for HIC (head injury counts). Honda CR-V driver/pass: 453/438; 3% chance of an AIS>4 head injury. Aztek: 685/430; 4% chance (source for percentages: NHTSA FAQ page graph). Big difference...Not!
Also maxintosh, go back and read my post #3345 for the first time, where I plainly stated "kinetic energy is NOT conserved in real crashes". Real collisions have a plastic phase (during crush) and an elastic phase (where structures are done absorbing energy and the cars behave like two marbles). The smaller car will undergo more total accelerations.
maxintosh, check out http://www.crashtest.com/explanations/deathrate/ie.htm for details about how they concluded in that nonprofit org running the site that eight-times finding. It's based on real losses from the HDLI. Also you seem to be having trouble reading my posts - in 3358 I said "my TWICE-AS-HEAVY vehicle"; I never said "in an Aztek-Civic crash..." Finally, I also noticed on crashtest.com that in 2000, 21,764 people died in cars in the US, vs 9250 for pickups and SUV's.
We bought our Aztek for many reasons, chief among them being that it best fits our needs and wants and is a great value for the features included.
You're sounding a little desperate now, criticizing Aztek's bold styling....
That's the coolest thing I've heard my tek compared to yet!
Well, next to a Star Trek shuttlecraft, of course.
I admit I like the angry kitchen appliance comment, that is cool :-)...a few more months and I'll have my own angry kitchen appliance. :-)
That would be neat for ours, since it's green and all...
I'm going by NHTSA's star ratings. If the Aztek was so great, why did it only get 3 stars driver and Marginal IIHS? I'm not a Honda fanatic, either. If the CR-V didn't get such great results, fine, I wouldn't buy it either.
Also maxintosh, go back and read my post #3345 for the first time, where I plainly stated "kinetic energy is NOT conserved in real crashes". Real collisions have a plastic phase (during crush) and an elastic phase (where structures are done absorbing energy and the cars behave like two marbles). The smaller car will undergo more total accelerations.
You were the same person that said a car twice as small would undergo eight times the acceleration, no? Because kinetic energy is mass and velocity, not acceleration.
I also noticed on crashtest.com that in 2000, 21,764 people died in cars in the US, vs 9250 for pickups and SUV's.
Here's a hint: there are MANY more cars on the road than SUVs, although the proportion IS changing. SUVs are also generally newer vehicles with modern safety features, while many cars still on the road are tin cans with automatic seat belts.
Nowhere on that page did I find that SUV occupants were eight times less likely to die... In fact, compact car owners had 200 deaths per million vehicles and 150 deaths per million midsize SUVs (for model years 1993-1996), according to that site. Compact SUVs had the highest death rate of them all, with 300 deaths per million vehicles.
Are you referring to the crash combos? Even according to that, if you were in a <2500 lb (which is VERY light, even the Civic is 2507 lbs, the New Beetle is 2,762, and the Jetta is 2,932 lb) car, it's 109 deaths per million in the car and 35 in the other vehicle. Where is eight times coming from?
The New Beetle which is a TINY car scored "Excellent" for injury claims. Not surprisingly it's also Best pick in the IIHS test and did well in the NHTSA test. But that couldn't have ANYTHING to do with engineering... :-\
I'm not trying to slight your Aztek, I'm perfeclty open-minded. I'd never buy one, aesthetics aside, because if it handles anything like the Grand Am I rented or the reviews say, then heck no... and also I'm not a big fan of the sloping hatch which limits cargo versatility. I think there are some cool interior gimmicks.
I'm all for bold styling, but I think the Aztek has too much plastic cladding, the headlights are too small and low on the facia, the rear window is sloped too dramatically, the C-pillar back looks disproportionate, the rear hatch is too long and only broken by body ribbing, and the rear bumper makes it look like it's dragging its behind. They also sit on the lot for eternity (or so the dealer told us when we went to drive an Envoy).
Again, that's just my opinion and if you're happy with your vehicle, then great!! I'll be happy with mine as well :-)
1. I have never claimed the Aztek has "great safety"! It is average. I often wonder why certain vehicles receive the star ratings they do - for example why did the Honda CR-V get 4 driver stars and the Aztek get 3, when there is only a 1% difference in the chance of their drivers getting a serious head injury?
2. I may have given you the wrong page before referencing the 'eight times' point (my apologies). It is on the same site I quoted, but is on this page: http://www.crashtest.com/explanations/weight/ie.htm AND I QUOTE: "Statistics show that if two vehicles with the same NHTSA full frontal rating crash into each other head on, but one vehicle weighs twice as much as the other, the occupants of the lighter one (2000 lbs / 909 kgs) are eight times more likely to be killed than the occupants of the heavier vehicle (4000 lbs / 1818 kgs). "
3. Kinetic energy and corresponding momentum are what CAUSE the accelerations. What in the world is your point?
4. Proportion of cars vs pickups/SUV's is probably a lot lower than you think, in fact I believe new vehicle sales have been roughly 50% trucks/SUV's for several years now. If you look through the page I quote above, data is provided showing the dramatic impact (not a pun) of vehicle weight on injury results, regardless of vehicle type.
5. As for styling: I like having the front turn signals on top of the fender. It is unique and is an ACTIVE SAFETY FEATURE since it makes it easier for other drivers to see you signaling on the freeway. I love the flash-to-pass feature on the headlights (yes I know many of the foreign cars you so adore also have this). I appreciate the ACTIVE SAFETY FEATURE of having large, high-mounted rear turn signals too. The dramatic and low rear window is one-of-a-kind and is also an ACTIVE SAFETY FEATURE my wife really likes since it makes it much easier to back up without running over our two little tykes. I like it's slope because it makes the Aztek look more sporty than any minivan I know of (my wife actually wanted a minivan when we started looking for a vehicle). The rear bumper is well-designed for standing or sitting, and again there is no other like it. You can instantly recognize an Aztek in a crowd of cars. In fact we have no trouble finding ours in a parking lot since its unique and striking D-pillar (bright GREEN on ours!) sticks up like a welcome flag amid a sea of drab, anonymous sedans and pickup trucks.
BTW we test drove a TrailBlazer (like the Envoy you drove). I was underwhelmed by its power after all the hype about its new I6 engine. That's because of its portly curb weight I imagine. Plus, it did not offer the Aztek's versatility, features like the HUD, interior space or value.
Also - who gives a hoot about how long a car has been on the lot? Are you trying to make a point about resale? Because I don't give a hoot about resale. We keep cars 7-10 years in our family.
If any posters I recognize as being frequent visitors herein ask me to refrain from posting more techno-jargon in this safety debate, I will.
Driver tried the wall test at the local Hardees. Drove right on in the shop. How do they score that?
BTW we test drove a TrailBlazer (like the Envoy you drove). I was underwhelmed by its power after all the hype about its new I6 engine. That's because of its portly curb weight I imagine. Plus, it did not offer the Aztek's versatility, features like the HUD, interior space or value.
Ditto! We disliked the Envoy. It had vague handling, uncomfortable seats, rubbery brakes and a plasticy interior. We looked at the TrailBlazer too, but same thing. We looked at the Explorer but were underwhelmed by its handling as well, it was only marginally better than our Durango we were trying to get rid of. We also looked at the MDX and Highlander as well, and both rode and drove extremely well. The MDX, though, had snotty dealers and a ridiculous waiting list so we had to settle on the spartan looking Highlander. It doesn't turn any heads but it's not offensive looking either, drives nicer than any SUV I've ever driven, gets good gas mileage, good cargo space, a logical interior and comfy seats.
It's certainly nice to enjoy the car you bought!
dindak - you have a point. I did not have time to take the TrailBlazer out on a freeway. I will say, it does move out pretty good. Fuel economy... is slightly worse than our Aztek though.
maxintosh - Agree with you on the Highlander. We looked into those before we got our Aztek. That's all I will say, so I don't start another debate! Hope you enjoy it.
I know you didn't specify leather in your post, but by any chance did you inquire if leather was available separately? Also if I may ask, what part of the country are you in? I live in the NY and haven't seen any on the lots yet.
http://www.usatoday.com/money/autos/2001/12/20/aztek.htm
K
Regards,
Andy
Re: the 1960 Buick. I drove my Mom's 1962 Buick Electra 225 4-door 4500 lb gunboat into a steel barrier at 30+ mph. in '64. Had to replace the 85 lb bumper is all. No seatbelts, no scratches. Still here.
Happy holidays to all Aztek owners, lovers and wannabes
amorales - thanks for the feedback. I saw another safety-related link: http://www.sherrigreen.com/SUVs.htm - written by a freelance writer who interviewed some safety experts at Rowen University in NJ. It said that in fatal wrecks between cars and pickups/vans/SUV's, 80% of the fatalities are in the car. It also said that in side impacts where a SUV hits a car, 30 car drivers are killed for every SUV driver lost. And it said that in fatal wrecks between SUV's and cars, 5.6 car drivers die for each SUV driver lost.
nextmoon - on our FWD 2001 Aztek GT with TCS, the light comes on whenever TCS activates - usually when I'm hotrodding it on a wet or sandy road!
barresa62 - Those two review cars regularly for the Detroit News (our daily paper). They usually purr for imports, and pan anything out of the ordinary - especially if domestic (except I've noticed "He" tends to like cars with a lot of power, regardless of origin). Of course I have some comments:
1. "Doesn't know what it is": For our family the Aztek has the best of both a minivan and an SUV. These folks sound like glass-is-half-empty types.
2. Cats-cradle net - why use it at all? We don't.
3. I cannot imagine how someone would view the hatch as difficult to shut. Balanced fine IMHO.
4. Tacky upholstery - have not seen the 2002's but ours is leather anyway and looks great. Why would someone shopping for a boldly-styled vehicle like the Aztek want bland, gray-as-always upholstery?
5. We seldom use the cargo cover but it works fine so I don't grasp the gripe.
6. How "He" managed to hydroplane is beyond me. Ours has never done this. Perhaps they have new tires on the 2002's and he had the base FWD tires. We upgraded our tires by having the dealer swap on a set of the white-letter puncture seal ones before we took delivery, a tip I learned right here on edmunds (thanks guys!). Also - we live in metro Detroit and I occasionally drive I-94; it has some nasty, bomb-crater-pothole ("repaired") sections. And what's this about the instability at speed? I've driven ours in the wind (even went 100 MPH once while wifey was napping) - no problems. I also have a 99 Formula and I would have noticed if the Aztek was "tippy".
7. Gee, that's terrible - a spoiler that blocks the following headlights!
8. "She" is probably not aware that the Aztek interior is patterned after diving equipment and that such style appeals to outdoorsy types like our family. I've seen Lexus interiors - not a fastener in sight - and quite boring. Here's another couple links (sorry you may need to remove some spaces I put in so I could post them at edmunds):
www.detnews.com/2001/autos /0111/24/autos-351117.htm
www.detnews.com/2001/autos /0110/10/b03-314718.htm
www.detnews.com/2001/autos /0110/01/a01-307664.htm
The light was large yellow box with words MAX TRAC ACTIVATION on the left of dash. Everytime i hit an area with heavy water accumulation the light went on. There was a sensation of adjustment. I was not comfortable staying in the far left lane. I moved one lane over. The rain was heavy. Wipers, defroster, overall handling was superb.
This is with OEM Uniroyals. I desire to upgrade to a 17 in. Will research a bit more.
I have never had my AWD hydro plane even in intense down pouring rains. Very high winds at 65 mph do not cause my Tek any problems such as the author mentioned.
I really like the para cloth seats and the pattern. I'm really tired of gray interiors.
Being a scuba diver it is neat to feel the materials used for switches and controls. The textures send my mind to remembrances of fun diving trips and plans for future dives. The shape of the knobs is similar to old scuba air tank knobs. The rubber handles have the feel of a dive knife.
My GT came with the sliding cargo tray for loading. The tray works very nicely, whether it is groceries or a couple hundred pounds of horse feed.
My Aztek is still drawing numerous unsolicited positive comments in parking lots.
Dan
Dan
dangbwi - I agree with your assessments of the he/she review. I'm not a diver but I also like the shape and texture of the door and grab handles. As for comments, I often talk with Aztek owners when I see them in parking lots, and I always ask them first "how do you like it?" I have yet to find even one with a negative word to say about it. Last week I saw a lady with a red one (had the car-top carrier). She said she "absolutely loves it". She used to have a Suburban and she said her hubby got her the carrier "so she could still carry all her junk around". They also had a big dog who kept climbing in and out (of the car not the carrier).
Tray usage: it works great for heavy stuff, like bags of water softener salt. I also like how easy it is to remove since we take it out for camping trips and long road trips when we have a lot of luggage.
squiredogs - we have driven at low speeds offroad with the gate up and the tent attached! I'm sure the owner manual wouldn't recommend that! Probably not driving on the road with the glass up either. I think anything over 20-30 MPH and the wind would blow it shut. What did you have in mind? It looks to me like a person could stick some long lumber out the rear with the tailgate up and the lifgate bungee-corded gently against it, if towels were used above and below the lumber to prevent scratches. You'd have to drive gently though. As for the 17's, sure they will bolt right on. I bet though that those wheels are $300-400 apiece from the dealer. That's typical for GM OEM aluminum wheels. A better bet might be to get aftermarket wheels like from tirerack.com. In fact, they have the Mille Miglia EVO5, 17x8, for $189 and it's practically a dead ringer for the Pontiac 17" rims. If I could only convince the wifey...
aesthetics. It may prove to be futile gesture. The $189 price tag is very attractive.
Re: Review. I discounted all the negative feedback as pure opinion. Sometime many drive tests are filled with personal comments and opinions which is well and good, but in this test, the Husband was trying to find fault in all areas. My Opinion of course. Wife already loves her AZTEK GT, am slowing falling for it each day.
I must say that the crash arguments are so painfully annoying I would shout of I could. No one will argue that some cars are safer than others, but my goodness. The quoting of physics is a mute point. All those equations are ideal and so many factors are left out. Were they sufficient in themselves the test would be done via computer simulation alone. As such, the tests are estimations and have to be taken as such. Really you should pay attention to two things. If a car comes out completely unscathed you should take note and hopefully think, "This car did very well this crash, but a lot was due to good luck." A car that comes out horribly scary (ie the F-150) should also be taken with a grain of salt. They crash these cars once, rarely twice. You never know what little factors could affect a single crash. Perhaps that single particular Aztek they crashed had a slightly slow airbag that is uncommon among the others. Crashing 50 would answer this question, but that's not economical. Also, the F-150 they crashed may have had a defect in the undercarriage that caused it to buckle and bend. As such a "typical" car may have a good day (or a good car) and do very very well.
I wouldn't fathom to say that the Aztek is very safe. I think that's a bad way to look at it. A better way of seeing it is that the Aztek's crash did not show anything significantly dangerous (again such as the F-150's nearly snapping in half).
I have to say I have experience hitting an unmovable barrier. Dodge hasn't been known for high ratings at the institute, particularly for thier older cars. Although my Shadow wasn't tested, I can imagine it would have done low since most other old dodges scored poor. I hit a tree with about a 4-5ft diameter at 50mph without a seatbelt. The cops were just stunned I wasn't dead. My passenger did have a seatbelt. I walked away with a bruise on my forhead and a welt on my knee. The passenger compartment looked the same as before the hit. Do I think that makes my old shadow safe? Hardly. I hit it just right with a lucky car and walked away. If the engine hadn't cracked in two and went around the tree I'd be dead with a 4cyl in my chest. Purhaps another shadow that came off the line with a slightly stronger engine would have budged before break. Who knows. The tree was just fine. I didn't even break through the bark.
I almost regret writing that because I can already hear the comments in my head. Oh well.
I'm not even going to get into the review. Why people still waste their breath on that idiotic debate is beyond me.
But if you have to have them, you can order the 2001's to fit in the 2002 but you'll have to pay for both.
Pontiac Aztek (AWD). It's on page 17 in the Testing, Testing section.
"Yeah, we know, we've heard it all too, but Pontiac's Aztek (AWD)
entry deserved a closer look. And let's face it, if you are driving
one of the most unusually styled vehicles on the planet, why not have
it in yellow? We picked a variety of terrain and immediately put this
platform through its paces. There was no doubt about it. Everywhere
we went we got the looks. Casual bystanders - even at this late date -
seemed to be interested in the Pontiac's styling and optional
features. Most asked about the optional tent feature, even though
they were not knowledgeable of the vehicle brand; others asked
specifics on how easy it was to assemble (definitely not on ther
first try). However, we were more interested in how this piece
performed in real-world off-road venues.
From selected elevated fire access roads to a one day trip through
the ruts and flowing streams of Southern Caloifornia's Cajon Pass,
this vehicle never failed its mission. The power curve delivered by
GM's venerable V-6 performed as promised. Our platform was equipped
with Uniroyal's new Tiger Paw tires with the Nailgard feature, and
they never missed a beat, even in the sandy conditions. Higher
altitudes meant larger rocks, and we went over these as well (with a
spotter, of course, to lead the way). Mileage figures were on target
with an overall of 19 mpg. Highway manners were surprising with the
addition of Versatrak AWD, and the larger tires provided a measurable
difference. High-speed manners were secure, both at the track and
occasionally above the posted limits, and high gusty winds did not
affect handling.
Most passengers felt the on-board features, such as the removable
containers andf the cup holders, were an added plus. Others commented
that this vehicle must have been designed from the inside out. Tha
availability of AWD and the suspension tweaks, along with the larger
tires, saves this platform. This year, the two-tone cladding is
removed (erronious comment...cladding is still there but body
colored), and that is definitely a step in the right direction. For
now, with all the rebate activity, the AWD Aztek certainly deserves
yet another look."
What it really comes down to is price, visuals, and equipment. I'm sorry, but while I may not take every car I test drive out to a skidpad or a slolum, I do check to see if I can afford it, like how it looks, and enjoy the comfort features I can afford. So assuming car reviewers aren't telling you anything that sets the Aztek apart (good or bad) that you can't see with your own eyes; why should their opinion matter? It doesn't take 20yrs experience to say you like how a car looks.
So the reviews boil down to just about that. Numbers don't change, but opinions do and I'll be a you know what before I let someone else tell me what I like and don't like.
Ah, now that that's out of the system. I found out from my mom this x-mas that they were going to take my Tek into a local aftermarket mod place called CARS. They've used them several times with good results. They were going to put the side tube bars on my Tek for X-mas, but cars wouldn't do it. They said the connection that went under the sides and connected to the frame would be so low they'd kill my clearance and in many places ground out. Anywho, they refused to do it. With only about 6-7 inches to begin with I get their point. Anyone else do this or have this said? I suppose a lift kit would be wise before attempting this mod. Perhaps in the future.
Oh yeah, just my opinion but I hate the 2002 Azteks more an more. Well, not hate. I thought for a bit that I liked the painted cladding, but I think it makes the front of the car look pointy (because the fog light cladding isn't painted). I like the angry badger look in front with the blunt snout and think the new 2002's look less boxy and more station wagonish.
I also don't know about the 17 inch tires. I know it improves handling, but this car is hardly meant to handle. Who on earth pushes an SUV to it's handling extremes? What I figure it would do is decrease your ride comfort quite a bit and that WOULD be noticeable on a daily basis. I would like to see the 235 width become standard, nothing wrong with 215, just 235 would be a nice touch. The red cloth is okay. I'd like to see red leather. That'd be nifty. I'd also like to see the armrests moved up about 4 inches (anyone knows how to do this feel free and tell me). Thos things are rediculously low. I put them down and they touch the side lower seat bolsters. They're more like bottom (as in your bottom) catchers rather than arm rests. I sit in my brothers grand caravan and those armrests actually hold your arms. Those things are just too looooow.
I hope the 2002s do very well. The aftermarket with them should be very interchangable and might help some of us 2001s make some mods. Another FYI is that pontiac now has owner websites for Tekies. They have your owners manual, service announcements, recalls (none yet), maintenance, and so on. Pretty cool and about time pontiac. They were so due for an update.
Oh yeah. Instead of the side steps my folks got me a 1943 .303 Enfield No. 4 MKI* rifle. All's well that ends well. Going out to shoot it now with my gift from last year, a 9mm Beretta FS. The family who shoots together, stays together.
Happy New years to all AZTEK lovers and haters....
Re: our '01 AZTEK GT oil leak. Dealer did dye test, replaced oil pan gasket-NC. Dlr was ultra courteous and attentive.
I suspect oil leak from vehicle sitting on lot almost whole year. Gaskets may have dried out. ??? Live near
desert (Riverside, Calif). Vehicle mfg Ramos Arizpe, Mexico 11/2000, purchased new 10/2001
First of all, they look MUCH better without the gray cladding. I know some like the cladding, I did not. The spoiler doesn't add much to the back but it's ok. The new larger tires with aluminum wheels are a BIG improvement also. Those small 16" plastic covered ones were bad.
In the end it's still not the best looking vehicle but it's much better. My wife thought she could live with one for a 3-year lease if the deals were good. She also said there were about 10 vehicles she would rather have so it's still a tough sell.
4.2L inline 6. Even GM's VORTEC 4.8L V8 may be too big. Milling the heads on 3.4, higher PSI injectors, freeer flowing exhaust may be all thats needed to make the AZTEK keep up with the 200 HP mini Vans and munchkin SUV's.
Happy New Years to all vehicle enthusiasts and SRV lovers
Regards,
Andy
ONE IMPROVEMENT I'd like to see on the air system is the option for RE-CIRC // FRESH AIR regardless of which setting you have it on. Currently, only the first two left-most settings offer ReCIRCULATION. Did I mention I HATE SMELLY-EXHAUSTED Cars/Trucks?
About engines - I saw an article, I believe in the Detroit News, where Buick is considering offering the supercharger now available thru GM dealers for installation on new and existing 3400 V6 Grand Am's, as an option on the Rendezvous. It seems to me it would be a small jump for Pontiac to do it too...
I agree with waymoresblues about the armrests - they seem fine to me. I helps that both our front seats are powered, so they can be raised or lowered to fit our sitting heights.
air filter questions - for the engine air filter, we use a drop-in K&N meant for the 2001 Grand Am GT. For the HVAC pollen filters (there are two of them right beside each other in our Aztek) they are part number 10435138, list for $21.64 and go for $12.96 at gmpartsdirect.com. I looked at ours today and they are starting to look a little dirty at 8500 mi. I was impressed at how easy they are to access.
cfawcett - congrats on your new Aztek! Tell us more about it! We continue to get more positive comments about ours. We just got another a couple days ago, at McDonalds of all places. They liked the color!