WANTING A PONTIAC AZTEK - $2800 (ANYWHERE)
I AM LOKING FOR SOMEBODY TO SELL ME A PONTIAC AZTEK FOR ABOUT 2800 OR LESS ( PLEASE) NEEDS TO RUN GOOD AND LOOK GOOD THANK YOU
WANTING A PONTIAC AZTEK - $2800 (ANYWHERE)
I AM LOKING FOR SOMEBODY TO SELL ME A PONTIAC AZTEK FOR ABOUT 2800 OR LESS ( PLEASE) NEEDS TO RUN GOOD AND LOOK GOOD THANK YOU
Even if he was willing to spend more money he might have to be flexible on the "look good" criteria.
They didn't look good when they were new. They guy needs to spent some money on an optomatrist visit. Then he needs therapy.
They look better than every 2009-2011 Acura and the Accord Crosstour...
I liked them....even thought about getting one before I priced them. The top three reasons why the Aztek was a failure
1) "Distinctive" looks only appeal to a tiny segment of the potential market
2) Nobody thinks "Pontiac" when they're looking for a small truck; i.e. there's no historical precedent for the model
3) When your marketing includes tents and rugged outdoorsy stuff, you should not be priced higher than the comparable jeep product...especially not if your product is FWD.
There's a pretty enthusiastic Aztek owner's club out there. Looks are subjective but my understanding is they were pretty good cars.
Somewhere in my life I have seen a picture of an old GM Handivan with the top two thirds of a Chevette welded on the top to make it a raised roof camper. I desperately wish I could find it, because thats what I saw when I first saw an Aztec.
from what I understand.. agianst all the crap that GM was putting out at the time.. The azteck was actually pretty well screwed together
When the guys at C/D were testing their first Aztek back in the day, a lady looked them over at a gas station and then said, "You're being paid to drive that thing, right?"
This may have been one of those very rare occasions when MORE focus groups would have helped. Or not.
Javelin wrote: They look better than every 2009-2011 Acura and the Accord Crosstour...
I don't agree, but even if I did, the cars above have many redeeming qualities that the Aztek does not.
mad_machine wrote: from what I understand.. agianst all the crap that GM was putting out at the time.. The azteck was actually pretty well screwed together
Well screwed together, maybe, but with very questionable parts. The 3.4L engines and 4T65E transmission of that era were giant piles. We change at least two a week on an Aztek or one of it's chassis mates (Rendezvous, Venture, Montana, Silhouette).
JoeyM wrote: 3) When your marketing includes tents and rugged outdoorsy stuff, you should not be priced higher than the comparable jeep product...especially not if your product is FWD.
or, ya know, make them out of a pile of minivan parts
Did they ever make these in AWD?
A new co-worker of mine has one, and apparently likes it enough to have "03 AZTEK" vanity plates. I have been meaning to ask him how he likes it.
The Aztek in the supplied photo looks like an Avalanche to me.
JoeyM wrote: I liked them....even thought about getting one before I priced them. The top three reasons why the Aztek was a failure 1) "Distinctive" looks only appeal to a tiny segment of the potential market 2) Nobody thinks "Pontiac" when they're looking for a small truck; i.e. there's no historical precedent for the model 3) When your marketing includes tents and rugged outdoorsy stuff, you should not be priced higher than the comparable jeep product...especially not if your product is FWD.
That's a thooper color on that Aztec.
^^I once heard the Aztec in that guise described as hindenburg-esque 
failboat wrote: Did they ever make these in AWD?
Yep, they did. Unfortunately, all they really did was create another point of failure. The rear diffs are crap too.
Wow! That guy is sooooper exited for an Aztec.
it actually does not look bad lowered, mono-chrome, and on big wheels
"Not bad?" That looks downright evil. Bring the wheel size down a couple inches, paint 'em black, and lose the goofy side-exit, and I wouldn't kick it outta bed.
You'll need to log in to post.
