Nope, it’s a new riff on the old Chrysler Airflow
As for fugly, I’ve gotta go with the chalk here, and say it’s the Aztek. Even the name is ugly to look at. Obviously trying so hard to be “cool” and failing so horribly can’t be excused. I agree with the poster who said it makes you question the owner’s judgement…people, man…wow.
Well, you’re anything but anonymous. You’re one of, what, five people counting the designers and the bosses, that actually like the Aztek?
Toyota had the good sense to see the advantage of the Aztek’s sloped-front, cut-off-tail design; the front “cuts through” headwinds, the tail “catches” tailwinds. I get phenomenal highway mileage compared with my old similar-weight Grand Caravan. Travelling from Omaha to Sioux Falls we got 29.2 mpg with a "20-to-25 mph with gusts to 35-40"wind at our back, and 25.6mpg on the return later that week against a 20 mph headwind.
A 20 mph headwind would have knocked the Dodge into sub-20s mpg. With a tailwind, it got about 22.
One can argue the relative merits/demerits of cladding vs. bare sides, headlight and grille shapes, etc., but the basic Aztek shape is a good idea.
The Honda Element seems to be very unpopular. I bought one when they first came out. It took a few months of therapy before I finally warmed up to it.
I think the ugliest car on the road is the most recent generation of Monte Carlo. What were they thinking?? If the looks are not enough to make you gouge your eyes out you should drive one. Holy crap! What an underachievement of engineering!
The PT convertibles are even fuglier.
Nope, it’s a riff on the mid- to late-30s sedan deliveries. Take this '34 for example.
I actually prefer that to the clown-car look of the hardtop.
Please tell me you are kidding with all this ‘headwind’ ‘tailwind’ talk.
Next you’ll be telling us you tack back and forth between the service road and HOV lane trying to catch the trade winds.
Sorry, but I disagree, and so does Motor Trend. My googlefu isn’t pulling up and old press releases but I’m 90% sure Chrysler made a point of connecting the two when it rolled this puppy out. Of course, there’s tastes of other styles, notably the various woodies of the 40s and 50s.
My Classic Car disagrees with you and Motor Trend, as does allpar.com. From the latter:
There’s a fine line between ugly-ugly and cute-ugly. When I bought my VW Beetle in the 1960s, lots of people thought it was ugly. There was even a Volkswagen ad campaign that mentioned the ugliness factor. But the Beetle was charming in its ugliness. A monstrosity like the Aztec is just ungainly and clunky-looking. Reminds me of the Edsel.
Those of us who don’t like the PT Cruiser should be glad that Chrysler chose to use the Plymouth Pronto as its base instead of the Plymouth Expresso or the Chrysler CCV.
I like the Pronto except for the tail lights.
While Tuckerfan brought up a good list of cars for Ogliest Car Evar, I’d say that, of cars I have actually seen on the road with my own eyes, the Aztek is ugliest.
Has anyone seen the Honda Ridgeline yet? I’ve seen a couple and decided it looks like the illegitamate offspring of a Pontiac Aztek and a Ford Explorer Sport Trac.
I like the Ford but not the Aztek. IMHO the Ridgeline is fugly.
Oh, and someone mentioned earlier the Subaru Tribeca. My wife and I hate it, and we own a Subaru. Oddly enough it isn’t the grill I dislike so much as the side view.
Well, upon reading the OP, my first thought was the Pacer for ugliest car on the road, but, you know, I’m stuck in the 80’s for the most part, and, realizing that I haven’t actually seen a Pacer in about a decade or more, and after reading posts in this thread, I must cast my vote for the Aztec for being the current ugliest car on the road these days.
However, if we’re looking for “all time ugliest”, I think the Pacer still holds the gold for thet award.
Unlike you, I like the Aztek but think the Ford with its uselessly-small cargo box is ridiculous. I generally like Ford trucks but the Sport Trac, the Super Crew(which with ITS uselessly-small box really isn’t so super.), and the SuperCrew’s Lincoln cousin are all really lousy designs.
The Aztek is roomy and a lot more economical than a Sport Trac.And you don’t need to buy a tonneau cover or shell to keep your goods out of the rain, either.
That said, I agree that the Ridgeline is repulsive.And it revisits an old Ford feature that’s better left buried. (Not the 2-way tailgate which is still cool after all these years).
The “innovative under boxfloor storage” is the spare tire well lid of Dad’s ‘61 Country Sedan wagon all over again. Wait till the rubes get sand in the hinges and latch.
Another generation of kids will learn their fathers’ full cussword vocabulary as nothing tried will quite get enough sand out to make it ever close quite right again.
I completely agree with the sentiments about the Aztek and PT Cruiser. To round out my top three I will throw out the smartcar. Haven’t seen any in the states, but having spent some time in Germany I saw MANY.
That would be the Lincoln Blackwood. As you can see from some of the comments here
You’re not the only who thought it was a lousy design. Ford quit selling them a little while back because customers were fed up with the long delays caused by Ford not wanting to ship a model with potential defects.
The Ridgline has been compared to the Chevy Avalanche.
At least the Avalanche (which is uglier in person) allows you to lower the gate between the passenger compartment and the bed and use some of the interior space wheareas the Ridgeline does not.
