Phil Edmunston......In his book "Lemon Aid 1999".......Executed a study of the most economical way of owning a vehicle.
Buy a vehicle.......Maintain it religiously......own it until repair costs surpass a set limit.
I have done that with my Toyota Corolla GTS (300,000 Kms) and my wood hauler Chevy Astro (333,000kms)........Both vehicles served me well and I intend to do the same with the Aztek.
There is no question that Honda/Toyota retain their value like no other vehicle (other then luxury brands).
That is why my intent is to buy and retain my AZTEK.
I will agree with those on the board that if you are looking for highest resale value......do not buy the AZTEK. However.......I have a very hard time shelling out $20,000 to $30,000 Cdn to buy a used vehicle.....even if it is a Honda or Toyota.
; ) ......... the aztek smile (owner of a great vehicle)
A sports-minded colleague told me she was behind "that new Pontiac SUV" the other day & was (positively) captivated by the looks of the rear. Turns out she was talking about the Aztek. She never got even with the vehicle & that's the closest she's ever gotten to one. Another colleague, on overhearing this conversation chimed in that she also really liked the looks. Still another added the same view - all agreeing that the Aztek design is far from elegant but neither is it ugly.
Yes, I leave on Friday from Toronto. Very much looking forward to the drive. I've done it once and it was not too bad. Air-fare for the family during March break would be $1,500 Cdn then the car rental for 10 days would be another $400 (at least).
So we are taking a slow drive down.....Enjoy the sites and the comfort of our AZTEK. Got great collection of CD's.....and My daughter will work on her french.
So there are alot of Azteks down there .....cool. Seen any Yellow??
I see you are a GM afficionado......I never had a great love for GM product . Long partial to Toyota. I must admit that the GM dealership I have dealt with was superior to my Toyota experience.
As for the AZTEK.......what are your thoughts on the vehicle?
As I said, the smarter person is the one that buys a car and keeps it! I didn't say anything about trading, or selling it. I plan to keep it and drive it, until it stops running.
If it doesn't stop running, I may give it to one of my children, or to charity for a tax write off.
If I depended on trade in value to purchase my next vehicle, that would be different. My previous posts have said this similar thing.
It is not wise to buy something expensive then use it until it is worth basically nothing. Miserly yes, but not wise.
The smart way is to buy something nearly new and resell it in a couple of years for very close to what you paid for it. That way you are never nursing the last few miles out of a 200k mile Astro van sending your wife and kids off in something that may not bring them home.
You also have the benefit of always having any repair covored under warranty.
For example you can find a used Aztek for maybe 60% of what it listed for a few months ago. Of course, an Aztek is an extreme example of vehicle depreciation. Do not attempt this at home.
I understand your point buying something nearly new and reselling.
Phil Edmunston a noted Automotive expert disagrees with you in his 1999 book lemon aid. His point is that a quality vehicle that is well maintained has a reduced ownership cost from years 5-8. In fact these are often the years where it is most economical to run due to multiple factors.
1. Financing costs are nil 2. Insurance costs are low. Very low. My Astro only cost $410 to insure as opposed to a new vehicle that is often near $1,000. This is a real cost of ownership that needs to be factored in.
His model is to keep a quality vehicle.
As for your remark about my Astro......I kept my vehicle very well maintained and my cost of ownership was very very inexpensive from year 5 through year 13. We used this vehicle for travel between the local train station and home. (2.5 miles)
Family was never in danger .
Most people are not car dealers flipping cars.....but if that is what you enjoy and you make money at it.....I tip my hat to you.
I ask .....is there a reason to maintain such an aggressive tone and posture. There remains no tangible proof of a 60% depriciation . I have checked Kelly Blue book, Auto Bytel, Cars.Com.......their is not one single AZTEK that is listed that has taken a 60% depreciation. I've checked every source you offered and find no reasonable tangible proof.
Please.....I ask you for proof. Until we see proof of the depreciation that you claim.....it remains hearsay.
I said it has depreciated TO 60% of it's original value NOT BY 60%.
But then again, you have repeatedly said cost is no object, so what does it matter to you?
(BTW- An Aztek that sold with a 26k sticker would worth 60% of it's MSRP = 15,600- You know if they're in the autotrader for 16k+ you certainly could negitiate down to 15k thus, what do you know, 60%.
eieieio, Sometimes, you don't have the choice of keeping it. The way some folks drive you just might get it totaled and have to replace it. That's what I call "forced Depreciation". Hopefully, it won't happen but I would hate to buy any vehicle that is a poor seller with low resale from the start.
Personally, I like to trade every three or four years. I like to keep a car in warranty at all times if possible. My '99 Jeep's 3 yr warranty will expire in December, and my '00 Mercedes will last for 4 yrs or 50,000 miles.
What kind of warranty is on the Aztek? I was surprised to hear that VW's only have a 2yr/24K warranty.
Mark ) (daimlerchrysler smile)
2010 Land Rover LR4, 2013 Honda CR-V, 2009 Bentley GTC, 1990 MB 500SL, 2001 MB S500, 2007 Lincoln TC, 1964 RR Silver Cloud III, 1995 MB E320 Cab., 2015 Prevost Liberty Coach
You know, Kissfan is really unbelievable. Over a MONTH ago, I posted a link on this site to TWO Pontiac dealers in California who were selling Used Azteks (<1000 miles) at an ASKING price of $16,600. I bring this up last week and he calls me and others "liars" and suggest to others here that because he searched "cars.com" and found no $16,000 Azteks it is "fabricated".
I've posted 10's of links to safety information and he calls it fabricated.
You're all right... there is NOTHING we can say to make him comprehend facts, so it is a waste of time to try and communicate with him period. I just hope the other readers here take his posts with a grain of salt because THEY are the ones posting inaccurate information and are doing a disservice to viewers interested in the Aztek. It is quite obvious that in his opinion, the Aztek can "do no wrong" and others should take note of this when doing research.
I just searched Yahoo and found this link to an Aztek for sale in the $16,000-$17,000 price range.
The link is too long to post (over 100 characters) so just go to Autotrader.com and you'll track it down.
Another FACT that should be noted here is that there are close to 100 used Azteks for sale on Autotrader.com ALONE... this doesn't include cars.com and the ones posted in local hometown newspapers nationwide. That means that OVER 1% of the Azteks sold (on sale about 6 months now?) are listed "for sale" as USED on one internet site alone. For comparison, that would be equal close to 3,500 2001 Honda Accords being up for sale used. Currently, there are only 165 Accords listed for sale (65 more than the Aztek).
Also, ePinions.com is a good source. You can read reviews there from people who actually own the vehicle. Some owners posted they chose to lease the Aztek because they feared poor resale.
The Aztek has a 3/36 basic, drivetrain and roadside warranty (6/100 for rust). For comparision, mark156, VW has 2/24 basic and 10/100 drivetrain. Steve Host Vans, SUVs, and Aftermarket & Accessories message boards
Try this link to the Aztek you mention on Autotrader.com
HERE. The cost for the for the car is question is $16,999 with 10,000 miles.
I notice you chose as your example the least expensive Aztek that had a price listed. There were 11 others below 20K (although 6 of those were within ten dollars of 20K) and the rest (about 45 that listed a price but I didn't make an exact count) were over 20K. I think your point regarding resale value would have more credibility if you took the average or median price of the Azteks listed at Autotrader rather than using the absolute lowest end of the range.
The picture of the Aztek you chose appears to be a base model, putting it's MSRP at $21,445 and it's discount with 10K miles in six months at a little more than 20 percent. That doesn't seem to bad to me but I don't know much about used car prices and how they are determined.
93 Azteks were found on the search I did and 458 Accords. I'm not sure why you compared Aztek to Accord. When I checked the Dodge Caravan I found only 164 entries and Ford Explorer, 486 which does seem support your point that the Aztek is disproportionately represented for sale on Autotrader.com, although I'm not sure how accurately Autotrader represents the real world. I chose these two since the Aztek is supposedly a hybrid SUV-Minivan combo.
Do you know what the total Aztek sales are by now? The 11,000 sales figure I thought was for YTD through December, have any updated figures for January and February been posted?
I personally think the Aztek is more of a sporty minivan than SUV but while I wouldn't be comfortable taking it truly offroad I would not hesitate to drive it on a gravelly, muddy, snow covered or rutted path. That's my opinion anyway.
89 percent of the reviewers on the ePinions.com site liked the Aztek and recommended it. There were, however only 28 reviews total which seems like a statistically insignificant sample to me. I read all three of the negative opinions and five or six of the more recent positive ones. I did not see resale value mentioned in any of those. Todd
Two summers ago, I did pretty much the opposite; drove from Florida up to Toronto in my Regal GS (which I have since sold). Even though it was a midsizer, it was a comfortable ride. Really enjoyed the sights along the way, especially when I stopped by the U.S. Air Force Museum in Dayton Ohio, combining my two passions, aviation and cars! I'm thinking of driving cross-country this summer in my new Bonneville, sort of a christening I guess.
By the way, where in Florida do you plan to drive to?
Actually, I've seen quite a few yellow Azteks down here. Most popular color seems to be either yellow, green, or white. Heck, I've even seen a yellow one that was owned by POP-A-LOCK (sort of a mobile locksmith company that helps people who locked their keys--or sometimes pets and kids!--in their car).
As far as what I think of the Aztek, I like it. When I bought my Bonnie a few months ago, I saw an Aztek at the Buick-Pontiac-GMC dealership. Kind of odd seeing it nestled between a LeSabre and a Century! It struck me as...unique, but the design has grown on me and I've come to find it quite appealing. Versitility seems endless with the various packages available, and I like the fact that its a minivan, but not really a minivan, if you know what I mean.
I went by the GMC, Ponitac dealer across the street from my office..I wanted to take a look at the new 2002 Envoy ( sharp looking).. Well I asked where the Azztek's were, last week there were 4 parked out front..(I thought maybe they were sold)....The salesman stated "we park them out back now" I asked why ..?? I quote " we cannot give them away"".. enough said..!!
Posted today at their www site: 2001 Pontiac Aztek 4-DR. 4x2; (No test planned for 4x2 front rating) 5 Stars Driver Side, 3 Stars Passenger Side. 2001 Pontiac Aztek 4-DR. 4x4; 3 Stars Driver Side Frontal, 4 Stars Passenger Frontal (No test planned for 4x4 side)
Those crash test ratings are below average for the vehicles tested... even the little Honda CRV scored better. If it ever gets IIHS tested, it'll probably be worse.
What is somewhat surprising is that these results (3/4 front and 5/3 side) are marginally worse than the Montana's ratings (4/3 front and 4/5 side). Ya gotsta wonder why. Of course, ANY small differences in box configuration, door opening size or weight distribution can dramatically change crash dynamics.
Still, it rates on a par with or marginally better than a Jeep Cherokee and Grand Cherokee (3/3 front and 3/5 side and 3/3 front and 4/5 side respectively) and I don't see the NHTSA's ratings keeping people from buying those vehicles.
Perhaps most people simply are not aware of the crash test results that are available to consumers? Although this is improving with the increased used of the Internet for research, I think that most people just listen to their salespersons (we know that they always tell the truth ;-) ;-)), or look in the specs for the obligatory airbags + ABS.
For example, a friend of mine that used to own a Pontiac Montana was completely oblivious to his van's poor offset crash test results till he was shopping for another vehicle since his Montana was at the end of the 2 year lease. When he was shopping around, he looked for the front airbags, side impact airbags, ABS and traction control, and thought that it was more than sufficient. I showed the van's results to him (at which point he was somewhat alarmed since he does a fair amount of driving) and shortly after, he bought another vehicle that had a good rating in the IIHS's crash test.
Drew Host Vans, SUVs, and Aftermarket and Accessories message boards
There has been some comparisons here on this forum between a BMW X5 and a Aztek. Let me wade through the propaganda and state some facts:: In the Consumer Reports Sepcial 2001 SUV issue on page 11.. They stated somehing like this>>>>>>> "The BMW X5 not only achieved "Best Pick" IT also was cited as being one of the BEST vehicle's EVER TESTED, IT STOOD OUT IN EVERY TEST!!! This is according to the IIHS and NHTS..!
Now the Aztek which even Pontiac Admits is based upon the "Montana Minivan Platform". In those same test's done be the IIHS, the Montana placed DEAD last...!!!!
So in summary IF you have a family , PLEASE make safety your # 1 priority when chosing a Automobile...All the propaganda in the world cannot refute REAL WORLD resuluts such as the offset crash test performed by the IIHS. No camping package in the world can replace your two year old son...!! BOTTOM line the Aztek's Safety at the very least in QUESTIONABLE , if you have a family do the research....IT'S WORTH IT..!!
P.S. The Mercedes M/class, and the Subaru Forestor also performed well in the IIHS tests......
... please don't put too much weight on those NHTSA scores. After all, we all know they can't be trusted. Why, the drive-thru clerk at McDonald's has told me personally that the Aztek is safe, and so did the gal behind the counter at Tim Horton's! So there you go. Can't believe everything you read, you know... ;-) <---- not an Aztek smile
Well, as you are all aware, I'm the guy that's been waiting on the crash-test data before making my final judgement...
The NHTSA scores are NOT good for the Aztek. I usually find the IIHS scores more "real-world" but they are ALWAYS lower than the NHTSA numbers. That being the case, the already low rear-side ratings worried me since that's where kids sit.
But with the Federal Government rating the driver at only 3 STARS.... the off-set results are sure to be as abysmal as the Montana. I realize that the IIHS has not off-set this vehicle yet, but there are NO cars off-set crashed that perform better than they did in a NHTSA frontal crash to date.
As we all know, the Montana got a 4-star frontal rating by the government and in the off-set tests done by IIHS and EuroCap was given the lowest ratings of any vehicle to date (the driver would most likely receive fatal injuries).
I am not here to say "I told you so"... but the fact is, a platform is a platform. True, you can make substantial upgrades to improve safety, but as I said in numerous other posts here, the Aztek was produced in under a year so little could have been done from an engineering standpoint to improve safety over the Montana. The current crash test proves this. It should be noted that the vehicle crashed was an AWD version which is heavier than the FWD version. This "COULD"... "COULD" explain why the AWD Aztek did worse than the FWD Montana tested.
The only rec. vehicles to perform as low as the Aztek are the Chevy Blazer (and it's cousins), the Chevy Tahoe and the Jeep Vehicles... NONE of which are cross-shoped by Aztek buyers. Most Aztek buyers cross-shopped mini-midsized SUVs and Minivans.
It should be noted that the Driver of a new Aztek is less safe than in ANY other tested 2001 Minivan (INCLUDING the Montana) and ANY other SUV (minus the models listed above).
Also, the Rav-4, the CR-v, the Forester and the Vitara (all much smaller and lighter in comparison) ALL performed better in driver crash safety as well as EVERY 2001 minivan tested to date (most of which scored a MINIMUM of 4 stars). In fact, the only other vehicle cross-shopped that performed worse than the Aztek was the 2001 Chrysler PT Cruiser.
This being the case, exluding the PT cruiser, ANY other 2001 minivan or ANY non-GM or Jeep produced SUV (mini, maxi or other) would be a better choice and provide more safety than the Pontiac Aztek.
BUYERS BEWARE: If you are seriously considering the Pontiac Aztek - particularly if you transport CHILDREN - be advised that the Driver (frontal) AND Rear Passengers (side impact) get ONLY 3 OUT OF 5 STARS and I would NOT recommend this vehicle for that reason alone. There are FAR SAFER vehicles with similar features on the market today and I suggest you go to www.nhtsa.gov for more data.
Snipped from post 1582 "BUYERS BEWARE: If you are seriously considering the Pontiac Aztek - particularly if you transport CHILDREN - be advised that the Driver (frontal) AND Rear Passengers (side impact) get ONLY 3 OUT OF 5 STARS"
In fact the Aztek got 5 stars for the driver and 3 for the rear in the side impact test. I am now safer from a side impact than in my Xterra (4 stars) although less safe from a front impact(4stars for Xterra vs 3 for Aztek). NHTSA says front impacts occur twice as often as side.
One thing I did notice was the actual impact figures don't jibe with the graphs that they provide to calculate injury probability. The figures for the driver are:
Front Impact - Head 685 HIC - ~8% chance of serious injury or 5 star rating Chest 57G - ~17% chance of serious injury or 4 star rating Femur 268lb left, 290lb right - ~3% chance of serious injury or 5 star rating
Side Impact - Thoracic 39TTI - ~3% chance of serious injury or 5 star rating Pelvis 52 - no unit or graph supplied, compare with Montana(65) or Xterra(96)
I have written to NHTSA asking them explain the discrepancy or what other factors they use to calculate their star ratings. I will let you know how they respond.
Your argument that the Aztek is the same as the Montana is faulty. If the Aztek was identical the NHTSA and IIHS wouldn't bother to test it they would simply lump it in with the Montana/Transport/Silhoutte/Venture category. Todd
I stated that the Aztek got a 3-star Driver-Frontal and 3-star rear-side impact rating. This is correct. (The 5-star was for front SIDE impact).
Also, I have NEVER said the Aztek was "identical" to the Montana. If you read my posts, I've always very clearly stated that the Aztek and the Montana share the same platform. That means, the Montana and the Aztek share: All non-styling componants from the A-pillar (windshield base) forward... which includes all sub-structure, engine, transmission, brakes, suspension, firewall, bumper mounts, etc. GM essentially created an Aztek-specific unibody mated to a smaller wheel-base montana platform. This is fact not my opinion. Of course, they aren't identical which is why I clearly state that the Aztek has NOT been crash tested by the IIHS (off-set). What I DO say is that NO VEHICLE OFF-SET CRASHED BY THE IIHS TO DATE HAS EVER RECEIVED A BETTER RATING THAN THE RESULTS POSTED BY THE NHTSA.
Since the Montana got a 4-star driver front crash test rating by the NHTSA and an abysmal rating by the IIHS and EuroCap for OFFSET front impact, it is more than obvious that the Aztek (a 3-STAR front driver rating from the NHTSA) will not fare well AT ALL in the Off-Set test.
And I'll repeat... There are vehicles rated "POOR" by the IIHS that have performed better in the front crash test performed by the NHTSA. HOWEVER... NO vehicles tested by the NHTSA perform BETTER in OFF-SET crash-tests.
If the Aztek only got a 3-Star driver rating in the regular frontal test, I can assure you, based on the results of EVERY OTHER VEHICLE CRASH TEST done by the IIHS to date that the Aztek will perform "3-star" AT BEST.... AT BEST... but most likely, far worse.
Where do you find information about platform similarities?
Despit your claims that the Montana and Aztek share all non-styling components from the A-pillar forward, the test results make me think there have been substantial changes to the structure. Particularly the leg trauma has been tremendously reduced, leading me to believe the engine compartment is much stiffer or more crush resistant.
This theory is born out by the upper body results which appear to indicate increased forces in those areas, as if the vehicle came to a much more abrubt stop with less collapse and absorption of crash energy by crumple zones. I'd expect the leg results and structure/safety cage ratings to improve significantly and the chest injury rating to decline a similar amount
Since the offset test is specifically designed test the structure of the vehicle rather than the restraint system I would not be surprised if the Aztek did show improvement on the IIHS test vs. the NHTSA. Forgive my rudeness but I don't believe for a moment that you have compared the results for every car tested by NHTSA to the identical model tested by IIHS. In any event we shall have to wait for the IIHS results to determine the facts.
Also, you do not need to shout your opinions. Many of them seem to have at least a marginal basis in fact, even if I disagree with your conclusions.
The IIHS test is a higher speed (40 mph)crash that concentrates the impact to a smaller section of the vehicle than the NHTSA test (35 mph). The increased speed and concentration of force places higher stress on the vehicle, guaranteeing a lower rating than the NHTSA ratings. Jmatero is correct in that statement.
The Toyota 4Runner got only a 4 star front impact driver-side rating from NHTSA and a Good rating from IIHS. Seems like an improvement rather than a decline.
There's no point in quibbling about the relative merits of various crash test systems. That's not what this board is for. I feel perfectly safe in my Aztek and I think it's as safe, or safer than any car I've owned and that's just how it is. I'll wait for the NHTSA response and IIHS results before making further judgements
Todd
ps. JMatero you may wish to check: Post 286"the Aztek is structurally (sp?) identical to the Pontiac Montana", "the aztek is a montana" Post 1141"the 2001 Pontiac Montana (Same as Aztek) Post 479"the aztek is NOT an SUV (truck)... it is a pontiac montana minivan" Post 735"The Aztek is a re-skinned Pontiac Montana Minivan
Thanks, I can't believe I wasted a lunch hour researching that. Do you own an Aztek? I've got a GT AWD that I'm quite pleased with. I've had mixed reviews on the appearance, about 50/50 ugly vs. cool. Everyone I've shown it too has liked the interior. I'd recommend it to anyone.
JMatero, I really hope we don't fall into an antagonistic relationship here. You're obviously quite passionate about automobile safety, for reasons that you've stated previously. But to say you'd never claimed the Montana and Aztek were identical seemed to me to necessitate a rebuttal given your past history of comparing the two. In any event I suppose we shall just have to disagree about the Aztek, hopefully in a civil manner.
My post regarding BMW and Aztek was in response to your friend "Kiss Fan" who keeps comparing a BMW to the Aztek..WHen it comes to safety ........there is no comparison..!!
Also there seems to be a lot of opinions and statements regarding the Safety of the Aztek.......THAT IS THE POINT..!!
When you have a FAMILY YOU TAKE NO CHANCES... So far the only REAL WOLRD CRASH TEST is the offset crash at IIHS. If you read about auto accidents , very FEW are the head on type performed by the NHTSA, while many are just like the offset type performed by the IIHS. Therefore at this point in time the only comparison we have is the test performed on the Montana Minivan, which Pontiac states is the same platform as the Aztek, and we all know the Montana came in DEAD last in the offset crash..
Oh and todd54, are U telling us you feel safer in a Aztek than a 4Runner...PLEASE..!!\\
BOTTOM LINE AGAIN,,if you are single go ahead and take your chances with the Aztek, if you have a family PLEASE take your time and DO NOT buy a vehicle with questionable crash results!!
All the IIHS , NHTSA, does not matter if your kids end up D.O.A.....I hope I do not need to spell that out..!!
Well, first let me say, YES... I did forget to run the "spell check" so my apologies.
Also, those "quotes" are taken out of context. If you read the lines before and after you'd have a better understanding of what I was trying to say. In fact, they were usually in response to a person who suggested the two vehicles "shared no common parts" and were "not on the same platform".
If I mislead anyone in the past, I apologize.
The Aztek, IS a re-skinned Montana. If you do your research you will see that the two share a common platform. This is fact. Write GM. It has been reported by almost every automotive magazine and website that has reviewed it... and this comes from GM itself who admit the Montana, Sillouette, Venture, Rondevous and Aztek share a common platform. I was at the International Auto Show in NYC last year and GM went out of their way telling the crowd how it was based on their "wildly popular Montana". You can take this up with the folks at Ponticac.
My comments about the off-set tests vs. NHTSA stand. This information came from a spokesman from the IIHS on Dateline NBC last year when asked why their results are always so much worse than the Federal Government's. He commented on how the speeds are higher and how the energy is concentrated on one specific area as opposed to being evenly distributed over the width of the vehicle.
I'm not trying to start an argument over this... I'm just saying that: The Aztek only gets 3-stars for driver frontal and Rear-side impact testing. That, along with the fact that we can expect the same... if not worse... results from the IIHS I PERSONALLY would not buy this vehicle, but buyers have to make their own judgements.
No, I said I feel as safe or safer than in any car I've ever owned. I've never owned or even considered owning a 4Runner. I also said "in my Aztek", so wailing melodramatically about taking my time and not buying an Aztek is pointless. Todd
If you are so concerned about the "term" platform, go down to your chosen dealership, any dealership, go to the parts department and ask to see the part number for a "platform". While the parts guy wastes his time trying to make sense with you, he will inform you that no such part exists. Why do some keep bringing this irrelevant term around to this board? You can do all the crash testing you want, You can skew all the "data" you want but there are basic laws of physics involved in surviving a collision. First is that the vehicle with the most energy wins. The best way to "survive" a collision is to avoid it. None of this has anything to do with any manufacturer or vehicle type. (or platform) Since some will choose this dead horse to whip and have labeled themselves safety "experts" why are they here? Why aren't they on other boards about vehicles that have done far worse? And how do they "know" so much? Are they "experts"? Are they concerned about others or just trying to be "right"? I think the later.
I will write this again for those who do not understand. There is no such part as a "platform". Maybe you sniffed to much Shell gasoline as a kid. You have some sort of flashback related to "platformate".
"sacrifice themselves" well I guess if they want too..I do not know if a world without one less Aztek driver would be a good thing or bad thing...?? But on the serious side Tony , if you do have family decisions should be made with them as the # 1 priority..
P.S. "Lexus" was top rated in IIHS test"
Ibe the dog>> your are missing the point... There just seems to be a lot of questions concerning the Aztek's ability to withstand a accident..SO THAT IS THE POINT..When there is a unknown factor (no IIHS offset crash yet) when it comes to safety:: Famous words by "Nancy Reagon" JUST SAY NO...!!
OH and the best way to avoid a crash test, is to avoid a accident "brilliant idea"...Just one problem, in FLA we have a over abundent number of people over 80 still driving and running red lights..YES avoiding a accident whould be my #1 priority; HOWEVER IF I DO GET INTO A ACCIDENT , I HOPE I DID NOT MAKE THE WRONG DECISION WHEN I PURCHASED MY CAR...
IT WOULD BE VERY SAD, IF THE CHOICE OF YOUR AUTOMOBILE WAS A LIFE OR DEATH DECISION..!!!
Comments
Buy a vehicle.......Maintain it religiously......own it until repair costs surpass a set limit.
I have done that with my Toyota Corolla GTS (300,000 Kms) and my wood hauler Chevy Astro (333,000kms)........Both vehicles served me well and I intend to do the same with the Aztek.
There is no question that Honda/Toyota retain their value like no other vehicle (other then luxury brands).
That is why my intent is to buy and retain my AZTEK.
I will agree with those on the board that if you are looking for highest resale value......do not buy the AZTEK. However.......I have a very hard time shelling out $20,000 to $30,000 Cdn to buy a used vehicle.....even if it is a Honda or Toyota.
; ) ......... the aztek smile (owner of a great vehicle)
All cars cost too much and depreciate too quickly. However, if I were to buy one of these, I would pick it up slightly used.
Brutal drive, Kissfan, from Toronto to FL. Did it once, never again.
Aesthetics are subjective after all.
So we are taking a slow drive down.....Enjoy the sites and the comfort of our AZTEK.
Got great collection of CD's.....and My daughter will work on her french.
So there are alot of Azteks down there .....cool. Seen any Yellow??
I see you are a GM afficionado......I never had a great love for GM product . Long partial to Toyota. I must admit that the GM dealership I have dealt with was superior to my Toyota experience.
As for the AZTEK.......what are your thoughts on the vehicle?
All the very best.
Regards,,
; ) ....... the aztek smile
If it doesn't stop running, I may give it to one of my children, or to charity for a tax write off.
If I depended on trade in value to purchase my next vehicle, that would be different. My previous posts have said this similar thing.
The smart way is to buy something nearly new and resell it in a couple of years for very close to what you paid for it. That way you are never nursing the last few miles out of a 200k mile Astro van sending your wife and kids off in something that may not bring them home.
You also have the benefit of always having any repair covored under warranty.
For example you can find a used Aztek for maybe 60% of what it listed for a few months ago.
Of course, an Aztek is an extreme example of vehicle depreciation. Do not attempt this at home.
Phil Edmunston a noted Automotive expert disagrees with you in his 1999 book lemon aid. His point is that a quality vehicle that is well maintained has a reduced ownership cost from years 5-8. In fact these are often the years where it is most economical to run due to multiple factors.
1. Financing costs are nil
2. Insurance costs are low. Very low. My Astro only cost $410 to insure as opposed to a new vehicle that is often near $1,000. This is a real cost of ownership that needs to be factored in.
His model is to keep a quality vehicle.
As for your remark about my Astro......I kept my vehicle very well maintained and my cost of ownership was very very inexpensive from year 5 through year 13. We used this vehicle for travel between the local train station and home. (2.5 miles)
Family was never in danger .
Most people are not car dealers flipping cars.....but if that is what you enjoy and you make money at it.....I tip my hat to you.
All the best!!
; ) ........ your aztek smile!!
I ask .....is there a reason to maintain such an aggressive tone and posture. There remains no tangible proof of a 60% depriciation . I have checked Kelly Blue book, Auto Bytel, Cars.Com.......their is not one single AZTEK that is listed that has taken a 60% depreciation. I've checked every source you offered and find no reasonable tangible proof.
Please.....I ask you for proof. Until we see proof of the depreciation that you claim.....it remains hearsay.
Thank you
But then again, you have repeatedly said cost is no object, so what does it matter to you?
(BTW- An Aztek that sold with a 26k sticker would worth 60% of it's MSRP = 15,600- You know if they're in the autotrader for 16k+ you certainly could negitiate down to 15k thus, what do you know, 60%.
Personally, I like to trade every three or four years. I like to keep a car in warranty at all times if possible. My '99 Jeep's 3 yr warranty will expire in December, and my '00 Mercedes will last for 4 yrs or 50,000 miles.
What kind of warranty is on the Aztek? I was surprised to hear that VW's only have a 2yr/24K warranty.
Mark
Pontiac Aztek- none of the above
I've posted 10's of links to safety information and he calls it fabricated.
You're all right... there is NOTHING we can say to make him comprehend facts, so it is a waste of time to try and communicate with him period. I just hope the other readers here take his posts with a grain of salt because THEY are the ones posting inaccurate information and are doing a disservice to viewers interested in the Aztek. It is quite obvious that in his opinion, the Aztek can "do no wrong" and others should take note of this when doing research.
I just searched Yahoo and found this link to an Aztek for sale in the $16,000-$17,000 price range.
The link is too long to post (over 100 characters) so just go to Autotrader.com and you'll track it down.
Another FACT that should be noted here is that there are close to 100 used Azteks for sale on Autotrader.com ALONE... this doesn't include cars.com and the ones posted in local hometown newspapers nationwide. That means that OVER 1% of the Azteks sold (on sale about 6 months now?) are listed "for sale" as USED on one internet site alone. For comparison, that would be equal close to 3,500 2001 Honda Accords being up for sale used. Currently, there are only 165 Accords listed for sale (65 more than the Aztek).
Steve
Host
Vans, SUVs, and Aftermarket & Accessories message boards
HERE. The cost for the for the car is question is $16,999 with 10,000 miles.
I notice you chose as your example the least expensive Aztek that had a price listed. There were 11 others below 20K (although 6 of those were within ten dollars of 20K) and the rest (about 45 that listed a price but I didn't make an exact count) were over 20K. I think your point regarding resale value would have more credibility if you took the average or median price of the Azteks listed at Autotrader rather than using the absolute lowest end of the range.
The picture of the Aztek you chose appears to be a base model, putting it's MSRP at $21,445 and it's discount with 10K miles in six months at a little more than 20 percent. That doesn't seem to bad to me but I don't know much about used car prices and how they are determined.
93 Azteks were found on the search I did and 458 Accords. I'm not sure why you compared Aztek to Accord. When I checked the Dodge Caravan I found only 164 entries and Ford Explorer, 486 which does seem support your point that the Aztek is disproportionately represented for sale on Autotrader.com, although I'm not sure how accurately Autotrader represents the real world. I chose these two since the Aztek is supposedly a hybrid SUV-Minivan combo.
Do you know what the total Aztek sales are by now? The 11,000 sales figure I thought was for YTD through December, have any updated figures for January and February been posted?
I personally think the Aztek is more of a sporty minivan than SUV but while I wouldn't be comfortable taking it truly offroad I would not hesitate to drive it on a gravelly, muddy, snow covered or rutted path. That's my opinion anyway.
Todd
Total Aztek sales for 2000.. 11,201
Jan Sales 2,938 (Best Month)
Feb Sales 2,576
Sales have yet to break 3,000 in any month.
Todd
Two summers ago, I did pretty much the opposite; drove from Florida up to Toronto in my Regal GS (which I have since sold). Even though it was a midsizer, it was a comfortable ride. Really enjoyed the sights along the way, especially when I stopped by the U.S. Air Force Museum in Dayton Ohio, combining my two passions, aviation and cars! I'm thinking of driving cross-country this summer in my new Bonneville, sort of a christening I guess.
By the way, where in Florida do you plan to drive to?
Actually, I've seen quite a few yellow Azteks down here. Most popular color seems to be either yellow, green, or white. Heck, I've even seen a yellow one that was owned by POP-A-LOCK (sort of a mobile locksmith company that helps people who locked their keys--or sometimes pets and kids!--in their car).
As far as what I think of the Aztek, I like it. When I bought my Bonnie a few months ago, I saw an Aztek at the Buick-Pontiac-GMC dealership. Kind of odd seeing it nestled between a LeSabre and a Century! It struck me as...unique, but the design has grown on me and I've come to find it quite appealing. Versitility seems endless with the various packages available, and I like the fact that its a minivan, but not really a minivan, if you know what I mean.
Best wishes!
2001 Pontiac Aztek 4-DR. 4x2; (No test planned for 4x2 front rating) 5 Stars Driver Side, 3 Stars Passenger Side.
2001 Pontiac Aztek 4-DR. 4x4; 3 Stars Driver Side Frontal, 4 Stars Passenger Frontal (No test planned for 4x4 side)
Well, there goes my Aztek purchase.
Steve
Host
Vans, SUVs, and Aftermarket & Accessories message boards
Still, it rates on a par with or marginally better than a Jeep Cherokee and Grand Cherokee (3/3 front and 3/5 side and 3/3 front and 4/5 side respectively) and I don't see the NHTSA's ratings keeping people from buying those vehicles.
For example, a friend of mine that used to own a Pontiac Montana was completely oblivious to his van's poor offset crash test results till he was shopping for another vehicle since his Montana was at the end of the 2 year lease. When he was shopping around, he looked for the front airbags, side impact airbags, ABS and traction control, and thought that it was more than sufficient. I showed the van's results to him (at which point he was somewhat alarmed since he does a fair amount of driving) and shortly after, he bought another vehicle that had a good rating in the IIHS's crash test.
Drew
Host
Vans, SUVs, and Aftermarket and Accessories message boards
In the Consumer Reports Sepcial 2001 SUV issue on page 11.. They stated somehing like this>>>>>>>
"The BMW X5 not only achieved "Best Pick" IT also was cited as being one of the BEST vehicle's EVER TESTED, IT STOOD OUT IN EVERY TEST!!!
This is according to the IIHS and NHTS..!
Now the Aztek which even Pontiac Admits is based upon the "Montana Minivan Platform". In those same test's done be the IIHS, the Montana placed DEAD last...!!!!
So in summary IF you have a family , PLEASE make safety your # 1 priority when chosing a Automobile...All the propaganda in the world cannot refute REAL WORLD resuluts such as the offset crash test performed by the IIHS.
No camping package in the world can replace your two year old son...!! BOTTOM line the Aztek's Safety at the very least in QUESTIONABLE , if you have a family do the research....IT'S WORTH IT..!!
P.S. The Mercedes M/class, and the Subaru Forestor also performed well in the IIHS tests......
;-) <---- not an Aztek smile
2017 Cadillac ATS Performance Premium 3.6
I believe the Aztek will be safer than comparable vehicles in real-world situations.
I think most drivers will swerve away when they see an Aztek in an effort to avoid exposing themselves, or their children, to it's appearance.
Thus, fewer potential collisions.
The NHTSA scores are NOT good for the Aztek. I usually find the IIHS scores more "real-world" but they are ALWAYS lower than the NHTSA numbers. That being the case, the already low rear-side ratings worried me since that's where kids sit.
But with the Federal Government rating the driver at only 3 STARS.... the off-set results are sure to be as abysmal as the Montana. I realize that the IIHS has not off-set this vehicle yet, but there are NO cars off-set crashed that perform better than they did in a NHTSA frontal crash to date.
As we all know, the Montana got a 4-star frontal rating by the government and in the off-set tests done by IIHS and EuroCap was given the lowest ratings of any vehicle to date (the driver would most likely receive fatal injuries).
I am not here to say "I told you so"... but the fact is, a platform is a platform. True, you can make substantial upgrades to improve safety, but as I said in numerous other posts here, the Aztek was produced in under a year so little could have been done from an engineering standpoint to improve safety over the Montana. The current crash test proves this. It should be noted that the vehicle crashed was an AWD version which is heavier than the FWD version. This "COULD"... "COULD" explain why the AWD Aztek did worse than the FWD Montana tested.
The only rec. vehicles to perform as low as the Aztek are the Chevy Blazer (and it's cousins), the Chevy Tahoe and the Jeep Vehicles... NONE of which are cross-shoped by Aztek buyers. Most Aztek buyers cross-shopped mini-midsized SUVs and Minivans.
It should be noted that the Driver of a new Aztek is less safe than in ANY other tested 2001 Minivan (INCLUDING the Montana) and ANY other SUV (minus the models listed above).
Also, the Rav-4, the CR-v, the Forester and the Vitara (all much smaller and lighter in comparison) ALL performed better in driver crash safety as well as EVERY 2001 minivan tested to date (most of which scored a MINIMUM of 4 stars). In fact, the only other vehicle cross-shopped that performed worse than the Aztek was the 2001 Chrysler PT Cruiser.
This being the case, exluding the PT cruiser, ANY other 2001 minivan or ANY non-GM or Jeep produced SUV (mini, maxi or other) would be a better choice and provide more safety than the Pontiac Aztek.
BUYERS BEWARE: If you are seriously considering the Pontiac Aztek - particularly if you transport CHILDREN - be advised that the Driver (frontal) AND Rear Passengers (side impact) get ONLY 3 OUT OF 5 STARS and I would NOT recommend this vehicle for that reason alone. There are FAR SAFER vehicles with similar features on the market today and I suggest you go to www.nhtsa.gov for more data.
I hope this information has been helpful.
In fact the Aztek got 5 stars for the driver and 3 for the rear in the side impact test. I am now safer from a side impact than in my Xterra (4 stars) although less safe from a front impact(4stars for Xterra vs 3 for Aztek). NHTSA says front impacts occur twice as often as side.
One thing I did notice was the actual impact figures don't jibe with the graphs that they provide to calculate injury probability. The figures for the driver are:
Front Impact -
Head 685 HIC - ~8% chance of serious injury or 5 star rating
Chest 57G - ~17% chance of serious injury or 4 star rating
Femur 268lb left, 290lb right - ~3% chance of serious injury or 5 star rating
Side Impact -
Thoracic 39TTI - ~3% chance of serious injury or 5 star rating
Pelvis 52 - no unit or graph supplied, compare with Montana(65) or Xterra(96)
I have written to NHTSA asking them explain the discrepancy or what other factors they use to calculate their star ratings. I will let you know how they respond.
Your argument that the Aztek is the same as the Montana is faulty. If the Aztek was identical the NHTSA and IIHS wouldn't bother to test it they would simply lump it in with the Montana/Transport/Silhoutte/Venture category.
Todd
I stated that the Aztek got a 3-star Driver-Frontal and 3-star rear-side impact rating. This is correct. (The 5-star was for front SIDE impact).
Also, I have NEVER said the Aztek was "identical" to the Montana. If you read my posts, I've always very clearly stated that the Aztek and the Montana share the same platform. That means, the Montana and the Aztek share: All non-styling componants from the A-pillar (windshield base) forward... which includes all sub-structure, engine, transmission, brakes, suspension, firewall, bumper mounts, etc. GM essentially created an Aztek-specific unibody mated to a smaller wheel-base montana platform. This is fact not my opinion. Of course, they aren't identical which is why I clearly state that the Aztek has NOT been crash tested by the IIHS (off-set). What I DO say is that NO VEHICLE OFF-SET CRASHED BY THE IIHS TO DATE HAS EVER RECEIVED A BETTER RATING THAN THE RESULTS POSTED BY THE NHTSA.
Since the Montana got a 4-star driver front crash test rating by the NHTSA and an abysmal rating by the IIHS and EuroCap for OFFSET front impact, it is more than obvious that the Aztek (a 3-STAR front driver rating from the NHTSA) will not fare well AT ALL in the Off-Set test.
And I'll repeat... There are vehicles rated "POOR" by the IIHS that have performed better in the front crash test performed by the NHTSA. HOWEVER... NO vehicles tested by the NHTSA perform BETTER in OFF-SET crash-tests.
If the Aztek only got a 3-Star driver rating in the regular frontal test, I can assure you, based on the results of EVERY OTHER VEHICLE CRASH TEST done by the IIHS to date that the Aztek will perform "3-star" AT BEST.... AT BEST... but most likely, far worse.
Where do you find information about platform similarities?
Despit your claims that the Montana and Aztek share all non-styling components from the A-pillar forward, the test results make me think there have been substantial changes to the structure. Particularly the leg trauma has been tremendously reduced, leading me to believe the engine compartment is much stiffer or more crush resistant.
This theory is born out by the upper body results which appear to indicate increased forces in those areas, as if the vehicle came to a much more abrubt stop with less collapse and absorption of crash energy by crumple zones. I'd expect the leg results and structure/safety cage ratings to improve significantly and the chest injury rating to decline a similar amount
Since the offset test is specifically designed test the structure of the vehicle rather than the restraint system I would not be surprised if the Aztek did show improvement on the IIHS test vs. the NHTSA. Forgive my rudeness but I don't believe for a moment that you have compared the results for every car tested by NHTSA to the identical model tested by IIHS. In any event we shall have to wait for the IIHS results to determine the facts.
Also, you do not need to shout your opinions. Many of them seem to have at least a marginal basis in fact, even if I disagree with your conclusions.
Todd
There's no point in quibbling about the relative merits of various crash test systems. That's not what this board is for. I feel perfectly safe in my Aztek and I think it's as safe, or safer than any car I've owned and that's just how it is. I'll wait for the NHTSA response and IIHS results before making further judgements
Todd
ps. JMatero you may wish to check:
Post 286 "the Aztek is structurally (sp?) identical to the Pontiac Montana", "the aztek is a montana"
Post 1141 "the 2001 Pontiac Montana (Same as Aztek)
Post 479 "the aztek is NOT an SUV (truck)... it is a pontiac montana minivan"
Post 735 "The Aztek is a re-skinned Pontiac Montana Minivan
JMatero, I really hope we don't fall into an antagonistic relationship here. You're obviously quite passionate about automobile safety, for reasons that you've stated previously. But to say you'd never claimed the Montana and Aztek were identical seemed to me to necessitate a rebuttal given your past history of comparing the two. In any event I suppose we shall just have to disagree about the Aztek, hopefully in a civil manner.
Todd
Also there seems to be a lot of opinions and statements regarding the Safety of the Aztek.......THAT IS THE POINT..!!
When you have a FAMILY YOU TAKE NO CHANCES...
So far the only REAL WOLRD CRASH TEST is the offset crash at IIHS. If you read about auto accidents , very FEW are the head on type performed by the NHTSA, while many are just like the offset type performed by the IIHS. Therefore at this point in time the only comparison we have is the test performed on the Montana Minivan, which Pontiac states is the same platform as the Aztek, and we all know the Montana came in DEAD last in the offset crash..
Oh and todd54, are U telling us you feel safer in a Aztek than a 4Runner...PLEASE..!!\\
BOTTOM LINE AGAIN,,if you are single go ahead and take your chances with the Aztek, if you have a family PLEASE take your time and DO NOT buy a vehicle with questionable crash results!!
All the IIHS , NHTSA, does not matter if your kids end up D.O.A.....I hope I do not need to spell that out..!!
Also, those "quotes" are taken out of context. If you read the lines before and after you'd have a better understanding of what I was trying to say. In fact, they were usually in response to a person who suggested the two vehicles "shared no common parts" and were "not on the same platform".
If I mislead anyone in the past, I apologize.
The Aztek, IS a re-skinned Montana. If you do your research you will see that the two share a common platform. This is fact. Write GM. It has been reported by almost every automotive magazine and website that has reviewed it... and this comes from GM itself who admit the Montana, Sillouette, Venture, Rondevous and Aztek share a common platform. I was at the International Auto Show in NYC last year and GM went out of their way telling the crowd how it was based on their "wildly popular Montana". You can take this up with the folks at Ponticac.
My comments about the off-set tests vs. NHTSA stand. This information came from a spokesman from the IIHS on Dateline NBC last year when asked why their results are always so much worse than the Federal Government's. He commented on how the speeds are higher and how the energy is concentrated on one specific area as opposed to being evenly distributed over the width of the vehicle.
I'm not trying to start an argument over this... I'm just saying that: The Aztek only gets 3-stars for driver frontal and Rear-side impact testing. That, along with the fact that we can expect the same... if not worse... results from the IIHS I PERSONALLY would not buy this vehicle, but buyers have to make their own judgements.
Are you implying that folks without families should sacrifice themselves?
;-) ...that Lexus wink, one of the top three rated SUVs on IIHS tests, Consumer Reports, etc, etc.
Todd
I will write this again for those who do not understand. There is no such part as a "platform". Maybe you sniffed to much Shell gasoline as a kid. You have some sort of flashback related to "platformate".
;-) ....that, oh you know, wink.
(you guys are way too much fun!)
P.S. "Lexus" was top rated in IIHS test"
Ibe the dog>> your are missing the point...
There just seems to be a lot of questions concerning the Aztek's ability to withstand a accident..SO THAT IS THE POINT..When there is a unknown factor (no IIHS offset crash yet) when it comes to safety:: Famous words by "Nancy Reagon" JUST SAY NO...!!
OH and the best way to avoid a crash test, is to avoid a accident "brilliant idea"...Just one problem, in FLA we have a over abundent number of people over 80 still driving and running red lights..YES avoiding a accident whould be my #1 priority; HOWEVER IF I DO GET INTO A ACCIDENT , I HOPE I DID NOT MAKE THE WRONG DECISION WHEN I PURCHASED MY CAR...
IT WOULD BE VERY SAD, IF THE CHOICE OF YOUR AUTOMOBILE WAS A LIFE OR DEATH DECISION..!!!
BMW < .> smile