Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
-juice
http://www.honda.co.jp/factbook/auto/STEPWGN/200104/03.html
Stepwagon - with handicapped seat option; not quite the simple swivelling front seat I recalled (ext view of outstretched drivers seat).
However, the first and third row seating look like they may have been adapted to the Element (see top photo).
http://www.honda.co.jp/factbook/auto/STEPWGN/200104/05.html
Looks like both first & second row are forward/rearward facing and the third row folds up to the side a'la Element. Front seats look like they swivel 180 degrees and second row looks to rotate back 180 degrees so the seat back becomes the seat bottom.
So Element may have face to face seating!
Steve
Host
SUVs, Vans and Aftermarket & Accessories Message Boards
-juice
Maybe the Axcess was ahead of it's time?
Just something to look for when they hit the showrooms; may be no biggie.
Steve
Host
SUVs, Vans and Aftermarket & Accessories Message Boards
Well, seeing how the seats fold up to the side and all, that creates a straight hallway into the back.
I just had a warped mental picture of that Focus commercial. When the kids climb out of the Focus, they find the're parked in the back of the Element.
It's all speculation, and wishful thinking on our part, but Honda can pull it all together....
I think they are limited more by budget than technical ability.
varmint: very good, can you produce that warped comm'l on a web page?-) Would be more productive than debating gm-lito on the pilot forum...:-}
I also noticed that the rear passengers don't really have an armrest. There's one on the rear door, but the seat is a good 12-18" farther back in the vehicle.
GM_Lito has tried to pit the Aztek against the CR-V, the Ody, and now the Pilot. How long before we see him in here?
As for the suicide doors, Yep, I would have liked sliding doors but it would have said VAN. 4 doors would have said me-too cute-ute. No, the Element is a fashion statement that says:
1. My car is bigger than your car. (Vibe/Matrix,Protege5,Focus,Civic,Impreza,Sentra,PT Cruiser,Neon,etc)
2. My face is prettier than your face.(Aztec)
3. My THING is different than your thing.
Steve
Host
SUVs, Vans and Aftermarket & Accessories Message Boards
I'd like the Element to have 48" wide rear opening to haul bldg materials flat on floor.
Seems reasonable:-} My Ody is about 76" wide with 48" opening, and 14" frame/int on each side ((76-48)/2=14"), and a lot of this depth is taken up by padding/storage nooks. The Element is about 70" wide which leaves about 11" for frame/chassis on each side.
This also supports the design of the small (about 14" to 18") tail-gate. This would allow 4'x8' sheets to fit within the dimensions of the lowered tail-gate. Wouldn't that be functional?!
Actually, I think Honda has to accommodate the 4'x8' dimension if it wants to break into the light truck market. This might be a start.
ropedart: You have again pointed out a major reason for vehicle selection in #3 above: "own thang", or what people want others to perceive as their thang.
Also, I do not discount possiblity of Honda adapting/modifying the face to face seating to the Element. I'm curious how they will accommodate the +-6" height difference between the front and rear seats. When I looked at the front seat views; it appeared that the seats could be slid all the way off their tracks rotated 180 degrees and reinstalled. Then all you'd need would be a seat height adjustment, or maybe there is a hidden elevated track/attachment under the front seats on which you'd mount the rearward facing seats???!!! Entirely doable.
varmint: I noticed the seats being farther back, too. In fact that would make it harder to load an infant seat, because you'd have to reach in with it. Of course Honda is targeting younger folks.
I kind of doubt a sheet of plywood could slide it, but if I'm wrong, Honda could built a pickup (SUT style) out of this platform. The only car-based competition would be the Baja, and Subaru definitely left a few doors open with some notable misses (no H6, short wheelbase, no midgate).
-juice
re: GM_lito - I admire the guy's tenacity. Just as long as he doesn't go into the typical "buy domestic" litany, I don't mind him.
Bob
BTW the Element is spec'd as 4 seater. The Element I am sure is as wide as CRV. So it can take 5 people in a crunch. You can see the space between the seat belts.(Really 5 seats usually means 4.75 people and the Element is about 4.5 seats. Just right for inserting a child seat). I knew the Element had to go to 4 seats because of the rear wheel intrusion. In order to lay down the rear seats they must clear the wheel wells. The CRV rear seats cannot lay down because of the wheel wells.
But I'm sure an Element will feel more spunky, fun to drive. Pilot won't even offer a manual tranny, right?
I wonder if that rear middle spot will even have a seat belt.
-juice
As for the Trailblazer EXT - it looks odd. GM should've just added a small 3rd row into the Trailblazer from the start. It's not hurting the Acura MDX, the Explorer or the Durango from a sales point of view.
Somebody said earlier GM took the utility out of the Minivan and put together the Aztek, what a joke.
The Aztek will do far more than this Pokemon rig ever thought about! LOL!
I had a Chevy Beretta, it was my 1st car I loved it. That's one of the reasons I'm such a GM advocate.
Why do you dislike me so much? This is only the 2nd time I've posted in this topic?
Why are you so against the Aztek anyway? What has it ever done to you? You do realize that it pretty much beats it's competitors in every category? You also drive a GM product? Don't you like it? You should have some brand loyalty, the Aztek may very well be one of the best vehicles ever produced by GM.
I am against the Aztec because it is just an extremely ugly version of the Montana. Nothing else.
Comparison is fine. Beating a dead horse is another. I am not angry at you per se. I just am tired of hearing how much better the Az is than anything else. Your opinion has been heard. Leave it at that. If a comparison is really what you want, start a Pilot versus Aztec thread.
Oh ya it's Aztek with a "k"
Well I guess this refuge from gm-lito and the Aztec is no more...
Play nice kids.......:-)
But you'll never confuse it for a garbage truck!
The 02' Aztek out handles, out brakes, has more cargo and payload capacity, and a way better stereo than the CRV or the Pilot. Oh it also comes with more standard features, is an overall better value, has had fewer TSB's than the CRV, oh ya and it gets better gas mileage than the Pilot.
It's also been proven to be a very well made, solid vehicle in it's 1st couple years. Reliable too!
Oh hey did I mention it cost less! Maybe I did, did I mention I like to watch you Honda guys squirm?
Varmint I think your species died when the Aztek was developed, your belief that America can't build anything better than Honda is outdated. Good luck on your CRV's and Pilots, when you see an Aztek maybe you'll think of me, and maybe you'll think,......
"you know that thing can hold 94 cubic feet of cargo and 1350 lbs of payload, oh ya and it out handles and out brakes the CRV and the Pilot; and gets better gas mileage than the Pilot too".
Steve
Host
SUVs, Vans and Aftermarket & Accessories Message Boards
How can I resist!
LOL
Steve
Host
SUVs, Vans and Aftermarket & Accessories Message Boards
If you have the cure then what's ailling you? (Physician heal thyself)
I find it hilarious that you can compare Aztec with a non-existent vehicle (my bad), and come out on top. But comparing the "big A" with other vehicles on a pick and choose parameters is par for your course (ohhhhh, sorry Steve).
However, Aztec comparisons with the Element are inevitable. They appear to be marketed in similar fashion; Aztec in suburban camping situations, and Element at beach/surf camps. Element demographics are painfully "gen Y" oriented (and off the mark) while Aztec demographics are just winging it - run it up the flag pole and see who salutes, and if not we can change the appearance.
They both originate from the minivan school of structural and aesthetic design though Element adheres to the "form follows function" philosophy more consistently. The up side of this is that both vehicles are positive statements for their minivan roots while taking the aesthetics in a new (read non-SUV) direction.
The benefits of this "minivan school of design" are undeniable, and to bring some of these benefits over to SUV-like-capable vehicles benefits consumers who own as well as coexist with vehicles like the Aztec, Element, upcoming Pacifica, Murano, and others entering the hybrid segment.
In the future, we'll be able to compare actual handling, mpg, volume and so forth; and I'll look forward to that. Even at this stage the two vehicles while similarly purposed, are probably in different size/weight classes. More importantly, they are implementations of similar philosophies with differing degrees of success.
My high school girl friend owned a Beretta GT, her brother owned two (a GT and later a GTU). The V6 was peppy but odd ergonomics and poor build quality sort of spoiled their experience.
I'm sure the Aztek will outbreak the Element. ;-)
At least I can understand the Rendezvous, because of the seating capacity. There is zero cargo room with the 3rd seat in place, though. While a V6 sounds nice on paper, it was coarse and unrefined during our test drive. It's not fuel efficient or quick, either.
We also drove a CR-V, and after chirping its tires in 2nd gear I can assure you it would blow away that coarse V6 in every way, except perhaps torque for towing.
But Aztec subtracts seats from the minivan without offering anything significant in return (at least nothing the Rendezvous doesn't do better). Even ignoring the looks, I don't get it.
Element adds utility to the hot selling CR-V for less money. That's easy to get.
-juice
Only time will tell how well the Aztek vs. CRV vs. Element reliability holds up. The Aztek does alot, and it pretty much does it better than the Rendevous, look at it's performance compared with the RDV.
When equipped with an auto the CRV and the Tek are very close in acceleration.
Juice - Actually, I expect that the Aztek will be pretty decent in terms of reliability. Many of the components have been around for a decade or so. I'm sure they've worked the bugs out by now.
That one MT review you keep using is not the final word on acceleration.
Although on the bottle it was producing 268 horses to the front wheels. It really screamed! FYI the car was extremely modified and pretty much surprised everything I went up against.
Oh well enough about the Beretta, lets talk about the Element. The performance of the Element in my mind should be exactly like that of the CRV. I mean I could be wrong, but the numbers tell me they are almost exactly the same vehicle. I might have said this earilier, but I think they should just add some styling accessories to the current CRV and scrap the Element all together.
I'm talking about the 17.0 the CRV ran in the quarter vs. the 17.3 the Aztek ran. These times were achieved in the same conditions by the same magazine. Let's stick with the program.
That's almost no difference especially when you consider the Aztek was clocked at a faster trap speed. The real difference comes when you put these vehicles through the slalom and braking tests. The Aztek wins hands down.
I've already expressed desire for:
48" wide opening (at least where the short tailgate folds down); longer 106" wheelbase from Stream which might enable greater cargo capacity (this is a long shot as that is nearly MDX/Pilot wheelbase). While the drivetrain is the same/similar to CR-V, the less luxurious Element would likely be lighter than the 3400 lbs CR-V by as much as 200 lbs. This would make for bigger horses on the Element; that is better hp to weight ratio. And for sportiness I would like to see the Civic Si/SiR dash shifter for the 5-spd manual. That would likely make for low 8sec 0-60 times for Element (CR-V is already at 8.5 with 5spd). Also would like less ground clearance; I don't off road but like AWD all weather traction - say just 6".
That C&D June issue reviewing the Pilot also had a comparo of what used to be called "econo-boxes", they are now called "stylish youth vehicles" (whatever). I kept wondering how the Element would fare in such a review, and if Element handling is more Civic than CR-V like, probably quite well.
IIRC, the data I referenced is from C&D. I'll double check.
Moonkat - I thought I read somewhere that the Element will have the same 8.1" clearance that the CR-V has. I'll have to look for that, too.
Of significant note is the fact that the Element has a completely flat floor. The floor under the front seats is exactly the same height as the cargo floor. That is not the case with the CR-V (or any other SUV that I know of). It's one difference between the wagon and van body styles.
Also, the wheel well intrusions into the cargo area seem farther apart than the CR-V. Makes me wonder if the rear suspension is a different design. If so, then the Element might handle worse than the CR-V, but be able to haul or two larger loads. Complete speculation, of course.
Of course I'm going to wish positive....enhanced handling as a result of this...:-)
Ground clearance; the 8.1 is credible as the photos seem to support this. It's just that an Element with about 4-5" clearance and wide fat tires would look like a Super mini-cooper (Maxi mini-cooper?) from the front view, and still offer a lot of utility, and sportiness.
Take another look at the Edmunds Element preview video to see what I mean. Same broad flat hood over pronounced headlights, high broad windshield, similar stance and proportions. This vehicle is going to be a tuner's delight....all kinds of possibilities.
And (positive) speculation fun is what we're about!