8 ms·

I don't really recall anything about the Aztek back when it was in production, but for the life of me I can't understand all of this hyperbole about it. To me,

I don't really recall anything about the Aztek back when it was in production, but for the life of me I can't understand all of this hyperbole about it. To me, it looks EXACTLY like half of the vehicles that I see on the road every time I drive to work. It's not all that different from a modern Suburu Outback, Honda CR-V, Kia Sorento, Hyundai Tuscon, etc. It's pretty much your standard-issue "crossover" vehicle (i.e. 21st-century station wagon). Granted, I think there's nothing particular attractive about "crossover" vehicles today, either. But they're popular and ubiquitous now. So is there some special aesthetic flaw in the Aztek that I'm not refined enough to appreciate, or is the issue simply that it was a decade ahead of its time?

hnal943 12y ago
I think that the Aztek is uniquely ugly as pictured, but you should find one without a color matched bottom. The ones I saw on the road has this taupe-colored plastic on the bottom half of the vehicle and it looks really terrible. I found a version of it with the grey bottom and the optional tent attachment. I think this is basically the ugliest configuration of any car that was commercially available in any era: http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2006/10/in-praise-of-the-pontiac-aztek/ http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2006/10/in-praise-of-the-po...
- joezydeco 12y ago
  I always thought this was an echo of the "sport" look of consumer electronics in the late 80s / early 90s. For example, the Sports Walkman: https://c1.staticflickr.com/3/2590/3820969452_8b0da67f1f.jpg https://c1.staticflickr.com/3/2590/3820969452_8b0da67f1f.jpg That extra dark plastic around the unit suggested an outdoorsy/rugged mode of use, even if the unit wasn't built to handle that.
hnal943 12y ago
I think that the Aztek is uniquely ugly as pictured, but you should find one without a color matched bottom. The ones I saw on the road has this taupe-colored plastic on the bottom half of the vehicle and it looks really terrible. I found a version of it with the grey bottom and the optional tent attachment. I think this is basically the ugliest configuration of any car that was commercially available in any era: http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2006/10/in-praise-of-the-pontiac-aztek/ http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2006/10/in-praise-of-the-po...
geophile 12y ago
When I was a kid, in the 60s, I loved cars. I'd visit the showrooms every September to see the new models. And some of the Pontiacs from the mid to late 60s were just stunningly beautiful. Buicks too. Then the 80s hit, and GM was surpassed by Japan on quality, and they made these ugly cars. You could tell that they had a VP in charge of cheapness who made sure that a corner would be cut if it was at all possible. I owned an 83 Oldsmobile that was so bad I got rid of it after four years. This is what happens when the bean counters take over a company.
calbear81 12y ago
It just looks ugly, that's the first impression most people got (based on the quote about the market testing), myself included. I think it's that the lines don't really flow well with the biggest problem being the back side that looks like someone chopped off the trunk. Don't get me started on the weird headlight layout in the front of the car. I think another car that suffered from similar problems was the Subaru Tribeca B9 which always rubbed me the wrong way.
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]

hnal943 12y ago

I think that the Aztek is uniquely ugly as pictured, but you should find one without a color matched bottom. The ones I saw on the road has this taupe-colored plastic on the bottom half of the vehicle and it looks really terrible. I found a version of it with the grey bottom and the optional tent attachment. I think this is basically the ugliest configuration of any car that was commercially available in any era: http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2006/10/in-praise-of-the-pontiac-aztek/ http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2006/10/in-praise-of-the-po...

joezydeco 12y ago
I always thought this was an echo of the "sport" look of consumer electronics in the late 80s / early 90s. For example, the Sports Walkman: https://c1.staticflickr.com/3/2590/3820969452_8b0da67f1f.jpg https://c1.staticflickr.com/3/2590/3820969452_8b0da67f1f.jpg That extra dark plastic around the unit suggested an outdoorsy/rugged mode of use, even if the unit wasn't built to handle that.

hnal943 12y ago

geophile 12y ago

When I was a kid, in the 60s, I loved cars. I'd visit the showrooms every September to see the new models. And some of the Pontiacs from the mid to late 60s were just stunningly beautiful. Buicks too. Then the 80s hit, and GM was surpassed by Japan on quality, and they made these ugly cars. You could tell that they had a VP in charge of cheapness who made sure that a corner would be cut if it was at all possible. I owned an 83 Oldsmobile that was so bad I got rid of it after four years. This is what happens when the bean counters take over a company.

calbear81 12y ago

It just looks ugly, that's the first impression most people got (based on the quote about the market testing), myself included. I think it's that the lines don't really flow well with the biggest problem being the back side that looks like someone chopped off the trunk. Don't get me started on the weird headlight layout in the front of the car. I think another car that suffered from similar problems was the Subaru Tribeca B9 which always rubbed me the wrong way.

deleted 12y ago

[deleted]