Saw one of these on the road the other day: http://www.acura.com/PhotoGallery.aspx?model=ZDX&modelYear=2011&context=photos-videos#/image1
I have to say, its SOOOOO much uglier in person that in the photos. I assumed whomever designed the Aztek would never work in auto design again. I was wrong . . .
Oh, and sorry if the photo link doesn't work. Pic posting owns me.
Sorry, I really like that crossover.
this is inevitable in an age where an emphasis on aerodynamics has resulted in cars that are just a bunch of indistinguishable bubbles.. car makers try out "bold" designs to stand out from the crowd. there will always be enough wanna-be ironic hipsters that will buy things like that just because of the ugly factor. this is why those fugly little boxes like the Scion whatever and the Honda Ailment have a following.
The Element is an honest to goodness really useful vehicle. It's homely yes, but it at least gains functionality from it.
I had one of those Acuras pull in next to me at a supermarket parking lot today. My first thought was "That's a berkeleying whale!!". Next to my Sentra, it's HUGE!!
Honda is lost, this is proof, their motorcycle division seems fairly confused lately as well.
I think the Accord Crossturd is way more ugly.
The Element is a great vehicle.
Its kind of like an Aztek with better everything. The aztek was a good idea that was killed only by its front end styling. Im just gonna say Nissan Juke here for NO reason..... Anyway i actually really like the back hatch on the aztek. /random.
That Acura has no rear headroom whatsoever.
pres589 wrote: their motorcycle division seems fairly confused lately as well.
Honda is so out of touch with the bike scene it's not funny.
I don't like the idea of a suv-coupe-hatch-wagon thing. Luckily I've seen a grand total of one of these monstrosities actually driving around since they've been released.
Ironically, an image search for honda cross tour results in something less repulsive. God forbid they have to call it a wagon.
the accord crosstour is indeed offensively ugly. mostly due to its size.
Who gave the green-light to this monstrosity?
That side-by-side picture of the crosstour and zdx begs the question of if the crosstour somehow has substantially different rear headroom??
That accord wagon looks half-decent.
Although, among accord wagons.. this gen is my fav.
As for the Murano convertible, it is truly mind-boggling. Motor Trend just wrote an article on it that pretty much just went along with the whole idea, but honestly.. i kind of hope it fails. There are far cooler ways to invent things noone asked for. Id rather they make a frontier convertible than a murano convertible, for gods sake.
I wouldn't call it pretty, but it's not Aztek-ugly, nor is any other Honda in my opinion. Put against the one below it, I think it's actually pretty good looking in comparison:
Now this is another matter altogether:
.JPG)
The first time I saw a crosstour was at the local Honda dealer. I was staring at it in disbelief. It was hard to look away. I still have no idea of what that car is supposed to be or what it is supposed to do, whether it is a car or an SUV. All I know is that is stupid ugly. Looks like the Acura version has an even uglier beak on the front and cost more to buy.
An answer to a question that not only hasn't been asked, but one that should never be answered.
I was behind an Aztek yesterday. It is way more uglier than either the Honda or Acura. However, I am still surprised by the loyalty of the Aztek owners.
Crosstours seem to have caught on here in Atlanta. I think they'd look pretty good if they had a different front end treatment - the weird "I'm not sure if I'm a car or truck" front end is pretty heinous. Something like a scaled up CR-Z front clip would make the car seem to fit together a lot better.
The Acura, though, really has me scratching my head. A 4500 lb SUV with no rear head room - why make something that big if you can't carry stuff in it?
I think the Aztek is now 'aged' enough to be somewhat accetable (I'll never buy one though) compared to this new crop of suv/hatch/whatever crosstour POSs that are out now. I hope I don't say the same thing ten years from now. FUGLY!
What about this beast?
MadScientistMatt wrote: A 4500 lb SUV with no rear head room - why make something that big if you can't carry stuff in it?
Is the Murano any better? I haven't been in one, but it doesn't look like it has any rear headroom or utility.
Not only is the ZDX ugly as sin, the one we had here at the office had a horrible interior. Parts would come off in your hand, the materials were cheap, it was a nightmare. The rear seat access is a bad joke, and the headroom is non-existant.
It was the worst Honda product I've ever experienced. A real head scratcher.
I'll agree that the ZDX is bad in pictures and worse in person. Only seen one Crosstour in real life, and it was hideous.
The Juke, OTOH, comes off a lot better in person than in pictures. I actually kind of dig it.
spitfirebill wrote: I was behind an Aztek yesterday. It is way more uglier than either the Honda or Acura. However, I am still surprised by the loyalty of the Aztek owners.
That's because Azteks are actually quite useful and utilitarian, if you can get past the fugliness and submediocre driving dynamics. These fat, high, squished coupesedantruck things don't even have that going for them.
Like Joe said, we kinda hated it too. (Though I can't speak for everyone.)
You'll need to log in to post.
