GTP Cool Wall: 2001-2005 Pontiac Aztek

  • Thread starter Thread starter White & Nerdy
  • 119 comments
  • 11,012 views

2001-2005 Pontiac Aztec

  • Total voters
    109
  • Poll closed .
LMSCorvetteGT2
Perhaps you just doubt because you have no first hand knowledge on the matter, or the person driving just couldn't make it happen.
Click to expand...

I do know what it feels like in a fast car, WRX, C63 AMG, Corvette's etc.
Although the Corvette was the only one out of those that felt pretty quick.
It's not because the driver was at fault, it's not hard to accelerate in a straight line and go through the gears.

LMSCorvetteGT2
Considering torque is the power and force in the physics you are thinking, no reason to be a smart ass.
Click to expand...

You don't think that's a bit aggressive no?
I've always believed in that method and was just trying to see what others use to figure it out.
No need to be like that.

LMSCorvetteGT2
Too bad it does. I've done it in the truck and it weighs more than your average car.
Click to expand...

What model/year is it? I've never felt anything like that in Dad's. (07 2500 Chevy)


LMSCorvetteGT2
Well I was going to mention to Niky that the car might be modified since you didn't do yourself any favor to be clarify about the topic.
Click to expand...

I don't see how that makes a difference as I stated the power output at the beginning. 330hp is still 330hp whether it's from a stock engine or from one that's swapped in.
The only difference I can tell with the WRX situation is weights. But I'm guessing that the RS and the STi are similar.
 
Last edited:
I think part of the problem is that different people have different standards as to what a quick car is. W&N thinks a V6 J-body is fast, while you don't think a 330 bhp Subaru is fast. Neither of you are wrong, you just hold standards that are different to what most people think.
 
Beeblebrox237
I think part of the problem is that different people have different standards as to what a quick car is. W&N thinks a V6 J-body is fast, while you don't think a 330 bhp Subaru is fast. Neither of you are wrong, you just hold standards that are different to what most people think.
Click to expand...

First time I agree with Beeblebrox, I'd say it subjective to an extent. When you start questioning or challenging the science (though mundane) of a cars acceleration abilities at a certain power range being able to plant you head, then being subjective turns into being naive and just plain wrong. Also considering many cars at 400+ range have an equivalent or worse power to weight ratio than a 300 Evo, 310 STi, Twin Turbo Cadi, or 270-280 turbo Dodge, Chevy, Ford...then you just are practicing bad math and asking to be wrong.

Anyways I've sadly derailed this due to another person's stubbornness and I apologize.
 
LMSCorvetteGT2
First time I agree with Beeblebrox, I'd say it subjective to an extent. When you start questioning or challenging the science (though mundane) of a cars acceleration abilities at a certain power range being able to plant you head, then being subjective turns into being naive and just plain wrong. Also considering many cars at 400+ range have an equivalent or worse power to weight ratio than a 300 Evo, 310 STi, Twin Turbo Cadi, or 270-280 turbo Dodge, Chevy, Ford...then you just are practicing bad math and asking to be wrong.

Anyways I've sadly derailed this due to another person's stubbornness and I apologize.
Click to expand...

None of that makes any sense.

I've tried to be patient with explaining this but you just seem to ignore it and are quite frankly being rude.
I'll put it simply, the only car I've ridden in to start to push back with a good amount of force was a C6 Corvette, so anything below that isn't going to cut it.

Beeblebrox237
I think part of the problem is that different people have different standards as to what a quick car is. W&N thinks a V6 J-body is fast, while you don't think a 330 bhp Subaru is fast. Neither of you are wrong, you just hold standards that are different to what most people think.
Click to expand...

This makes sense.
 
IMO, a car doesn't have to have at least 400hp to push you back in your seat. A 280hp Legacy GT-B pushed me back far into my seat. So did a 13B Mazda 626, with around 300hp as well.
 
Bopop4
None of that makes any sense.

I've tried to be patient with explaining this but you just seem to ignore it and are quite frankly being rude.
I'll put it simply, the only car I've ridden in to start to push back with a good amount of force was a C6 Corvette, so anything below that isn't going to cut it.
Click to expand...

So because that is the only car that you've had an experience in is a Vette (I also experienced this in a C4 which had less then 400 too), nothing else will do it below that. The reality is I'm not ignoring anything with even your only variable in play (power to weight), a turbo charged car with a better power to weight wouldn't do it then? That would contradict what you said prior. Others have also proved you wrong, either you can acknowledge them or just keep this tirade going on. It's one thing to say you haven't had the chance outside of the Vette, but it's an entirely different thing to say that a car under 400 hp can't possibly have such force of acceleration even though the science says otherwise.
 
LMSCorvetteGT2
Quoted for convenience.
Click to expand...

It's not the only car, but it's the fastest I've been in. I too have ridden in a C4, but that can't compare to a C6.
Of course a turbo car could do it if it had enough power, but a stock STi isn't going to.

I don't know what this proof is, elaborate?

I put down a varied list of cars and a truck that are within your beliefs of having "head planting" acceleration.

I used the 'Vette as a reference because that came the closet to planting a head. If a 450hp+ Corvette can't quite do it then how on earth is a diesel truck or road legal rally car going to do it?
 
Bopop4
It's not the only car, but it's the fastest I've been in. I too have ridden in a C4, but that can't compare to a C6.
Of course a turbo car could do it if it had enough power, but a stock STi isn't going to.

I don't know what this proof is, elaborate?

I put down a varied list of cars and a truck that are within your beliefs of having "head planting" acceleration.

I used the 'Vette as a reference because that came the closet to planting a head. If a 450hp+ Corvette can't quite do it then how on earth is a diesel truck or road legal rally car going to do it?
Click to expand...

Once again it's called torque...look it up. If you want to continue this conversation we can do so in private to not detract further I suppose.
 
Bopop4
It's not the only car, but it's the fastest I've been in. I too have ridden in a C4, but that can't compare to a C6.
Of course a turbo car could do it if it had enough power, but a stock STi isn't going to.

I don't know what this proof is, elaborate?

I put down a varied list of cars and a truck that are within your beliefs of having "head planting" acceleration.

I used the 'Vette as a reference because that came the closet to planting a head. If a 450hp+ Corvette can't quite do it then how on earth is a diesel truck or road legal rally car going to do it?
Click to expand...

Torque is what plants your head. Diesel trucks have absurd amounts of power, anywhere from 500 horsepower and 800+ lb-ft of torque. In a 4,000 pound vehicle, your head is getting planted.
 
Slashfan
Torque is what plants your head. Diesel trucks have absurd amounts of power, anywhere from 500 horsepower and 800+ lb-ft of torque. In a 4,000 pound vehicle, your head is getting planted.
Click to expand...

Though I agree with you, the engineer in me has to tell you that the 4000 pound figure for a 2500 (for example) isn't close to the curb weight. Other than that I absolutely agree with you, the torque and after lag boost will easily plant you especially if you allow for the turbo to spool to peak.
 
LMSCorvetteGT2
Though I agree with you, the engineer in me has to tell you that the 4000 pound figure for a 2500 (for example) isn't close to the curb weight. Other than that I absolutely agree with you, the torque and after lag boost will easily plant you especially if you allow for the turbo to spool to peak.
Click to expand...
Ill admit that was an oddball number I threw out there. I'm think curb weight is much closer to 4,800-5,500lbs. They certainly have gotten a lot lighter since mine came out. Door tag sticker there says 6,512 dry. With my iron on it, I'd say its closer to 8,000lbs.

I can definitely say the will plant you especially in 4wd. The Toyota tundra TRD with a 5.7L v8 (effectively a ford engine anyways) will do 0-60 in 4.4 and it pumps out 550hp and equal torque. That will plant you nicely. And that's not even a diesel.
 
Dennisch
And this is still the thread about a Pontiac. The Aztek.
Click to expand...
And yet two days later we're still talking about Ford engines in Toyota bodies, 500+ HP and torque. None of which have anything in common with the Aztek.
 
Slashfan
I can definitely say the will plant you especially in 4wd. The Toyota tundra TRD with a 5.7L v8 (effectively a ford engine anyways) will do 0-60 in 4.4 and it pumps out 550hp and equal torque. That will plant you nicely. And that's not even a diesel.
Click to expand...

artworks-000032605198-ukw543-crop.jpg
 
Doog
artworks-000032605198-ukw543-crop.jpg
Click to expand...
I once read a comparison between both the Toyota 5.7 vs the Ford 351 Cleveland which showed alarmingly similar internal specs. From what I gathered, its basically a modernized carbon copy of a 351 Cleveland engine. Can't remember where I saw that though. I'm lookin for it ATM.
 
Seriously Uncool imo.
It's the worse car I can think of that was made under the Pontiac brand.
If I got my hands on one, it would be smashed by a piano.
 
RandomCarGuy17
Seriously Uncool imo.
It's the worse car I can think of that was made under the Pontiac brand.
If I got my hands on one, it would be smashed by a piano.
Click to expand...
Is that all, I would do that and then set it alight :lol:
 
While it didn't go as low as I thought it deserved, this car is still warming up the Cool Wall with a final rating of -1.349. I'll never know how this car ended up rated higher than the Cadillac Cimarron, at least Cadillac recovered from that!

The Aztek came fairly close, though, and is currently the third-least-cool vehicle on the wall.
 
Slashfan
I once read a comparison between both the Toyota 5.7 vs the Ford 351 Cleveland which showed alarmingly similar internal specs. From what I gathered, its basically a modernized carbon copy of a 351 Cleveland engine. Can't remember where I saw that though. I'm lookin for it ATM.
Click to expand...

Toyota did the same with their 4A GE, which was a mass-produced copy of the Ford/Cosworth BDA.
 
TheCracker
Toyota did the same with their 4A GE, which was a mass-produced copy of the Ford/Cosworth BDA.
Click to expand...
Really doesn't surprise me honestly. I didn't know that though, so thanks for sharing 👍
 
Adamgp
Toyota likes to reverse engineer/copy other's designs.

Their Nascar engine is basically a copy of Chevy's engine.
Click to expand...

The TRD 5.7L is the street version of the Toyota Nascar engine, which as I said is a copy of the 351 Cleveland with a different bore/stroke. The Chevy engine is not even close to anything in production. They use the R07 engine, where the cam is higher in the block, has different bore spacing etc. Ford used the FR9 engine, which is a modernized 351 Windsor to replace, ironically enough, the 351 Windsor they've used since forever. That change took place in '09.
 
White & Nerdy
Here I thought the Chevy engine was a version of the SBC.
Click to expand...
Not even close lol. Not anymore anyways. Old days yes but the new ones are actually a Roush built engine with Chevy valve covers. Actually I think Roush builds most of them and they rent them out. A fresh engine is built for each race and I heard they pay Roush somewhere in the vicinity of $80,000 per engine. They make around 850 horsepower with a Holley 750cfm carb and on Daytona the restrict that to about 650hp with a 390cfm carb.

The FR9 motor from Ford was actually built as a partnership with Roush. The motor came at 2009 replacing the 351W which was used since the '90s, which replaced the 351 Cleveland that was used since the '70s when Nascar made a rule that no engine can be larger than 358ci....basically no more big blocks. Engines back then made around 650hp, the FR9 makes around 900 in full race trim and can be bought through Ford racing. The 351W used in Nascar used Yates heads which were updated 351 Cleveland heads, effectively making the engine a Boss 302 engine only which the increased displacement it became a Boss 351 (not to be confused with the Boss 351 using a Cleveland engine in the Mustang). They were way closer to their production originals than any other contender, up until 2009 when the FR9 motor came out.

The rear axles are also a Ford 9" which I believe each contender in Nascar uses though I could be wrong.
 
Last edited:

Latest Posts

Back