One Eyed Dollar
Flush
I saw a forum post somewhere long ago from a GM engineer who said they all referred to it as the Ass-Wreck. Ha!
Faded Spade (2 Viewers)
- Thread starter SixSpeedFury
- Start date
- Joined
- Nov 7, 2014
- Messages
- 2,136
- Reaction score
- 2,342
- Location
- Northern NJ and NY/Long Island Areas
...a car way ahead of its time,
Probably not
, sice that would make him way ahead of his time, inventing a new category & style ( CUV) way before anyone else!!
"....The Aztek, introduced in 2001, was an attempt to do something entirely different… It’s easy to berate GM for always failing to see where the market is going. But in this instance it was the first to recognize the need for a new kind of vehicle to fill the crossover segment, which would grow rapidly in subsequent years. A crossover is basically a 21st-century station wagon. SUVs are usually built on the same platform used for trucks—and they often feel that way when you drive them. They also inhale gas. Crossovers, by contrast, are built on platforms used for cars, so they have better road manners, and they’re more fuel-efficient. There were some crossover-ish vehicles before the Aztek, such as the Subaru Forester, but these were seen as neo-wagons, or small/compact SUVs. With the Aztek, GM created something that had SUV size, minus the SUV stigma. An innovative GM? Well, yes. GM can sometimes be, for all its detractors, troublingly ahead of the curve. And the Aztek was first in this mold...."
http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2009/11/remember-the-aztek/
Probably not
, sice that would make him way ahead of his time, inventing a new category & style ( CUV) way before anyone else!!"....The Aztek, introduced in 2001, was an attempt to do something entirely different… It’s easy to berate GM for always failing to see where the market is going. But in this instance it was the first to recognize the need for a new kind of vehicle to fill the crossover segment, which would grow rapidly in subsequent years. A crossover is basically a 21st-century station wagon. SUVs are usually built on the same platform used for trucks—and they often feel that way when you drive them. They also inhale gas. Crossovers, by contrast, are built on platforms used for cars, so they have better road manners, and they’re more fuel-efficient. There were some crossover-ish vehicles before the Aztek, such as the Subaru Forester, but these were seen as neo-wagons, or small/compact SUVs. With the Aztek, GM created something that had SUV size, minus the SUV stigma. An innovative GM? Well, yes. GM can sometimes be, for all its detractors, troublingly ahead of the curve. And the Aztek was first in this mold...."
http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2009/11/remember-the-aztek/
Last edited:
One Eyed Dollar
Flush
When I see an Aztek on the road I try not to follow too closely or drive in the lane next to them. Because obviously the driver must be legally blind.
- Joined
- Nov 7, 2014
- Messages
- 2,136
- Reaction score
- 2,342
- Location
- Northern NJ and NY/Long Island Areas
I don't think anyone has a problem with the vision or functionality of the vehicle..... just with the damage that it inflicts on one's eyes....a car way ahead of its time,
Probably not
"....The Aztek, introduced in 2001, was an attempt to do something entirely different… It’s easy to berate GM for always failing to see where the market is going. But in this instance it was the first to recognize the need for a new kind of vehicle to fill the crossover segment, which would grow rapidly in subsequent years. A crossover is basically a 21st-century station wagon. SUVs are usually built on the same platform used for trucks—and they often feel that way when you drive them. They also inhale gas. Crossovers, by contrast, are built on platforms used for cars, so they have better road manners, and they’re more fuel-efficient. There were some crossover-ish vehicles before the Aztek, such as the Subaru Forester, but these were seen as neo-wagons, or small/compact SUVs. With the Aztek, GM created something that had SUV size, minus the SUV stigma. An innovative GM? Well, yes. GM can sometimes be, for all its detractors, troublingly ahead of the curve. And the Aztek was first in this mold...."
http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2009/11/remember-the-aztek/
I'm not sure they could have designed it to be more ugly if they had intentionally tried.
Old State
Full House
- Joined
- Jul 20, 2016
- Messages
- 3,009
- Reaction score
- 4,810
Yes, innovation and astectics are not mutually exclusive and often go hand in hand.
And I believe the Aztec was originally marketed with some kind of built-in tent attachment? There can’t be many people interested in that. If people like camping, they’re gonna pitch a proper tent. If they don’t like camping, they’re not gonna want to do it in the bag of their ugly car.
SWEATER
3 of a Kind
Still haven't received my Bridge cards yet but got this for a 20% discount in my mailbox late last night.
- Joined
- Nov 7, 2014
- Messages
- 2,136
- Reaction score
- 2,342
- Location
- Northern NJ and NY/Long Island Areas
OK , I ordered as set of Bridge with the discount code .. which essentially canceled out the $5 shipping fee ..
"Hmmmm.... how could we possibly make this vehicle even ~more~ ugly? Wait, I have an idea...."
These cards are stupid thick.... Like...the thickest cards I've ever held. They are so much thicker than any of the USPlaying Card Company brands, Copaq, or Gemaco cards. It's kind of obnoxious. I'll do a little review of them in a minute.
Received part of my Bridge/Jumbo order today. First impressions:
Thickness issue gone! For comparison these decks are the same thickness as my Fournier 2826 and just a tad thicker than my Desjgn Classic Cultures. Obviously someone was listening about the thickness issues and made changes. (y) :thumbsup:
One reason they are not as thick is they are on a totally different stock. While the Poker size cards had a rougher textured surface, these Bridge cards have a little slicker (not as slick as say Bicylce Prestiges) textured face/back but still flexable and don't feel flimsy thin.
The large font printing, court cards are all the same as the Poker decks just sized for Bridge cards. Even the chemical smell is less if not totally gone.
Really liking these Bridge cards. Nothing like the super thick behemoth Poker decks. Will make the rotation. Going to bring a setup to the Piss'd N Broke meetup for folks to try out.
Thickness issue gone! For comparison these decks are the same thickness as my Fournier 2826 and just a tad thicker than my Desjgn Classic Cultures. Obviously someone was listening about the thickness issues and made changes. (y) :thumbsup:
One reason they are not as thick is they are on a totally different stock. While the Poker size cards had a rougher textured surface, these Bridge cards have a little slicker (not as slick as say Bicylce Prestiges) textured face/back but still flexable and don't feel flimsy thin.
The large font printing, court cards are all the same as the Poker decks just sized for Bridge cards. Even the chemical smell is less if not totally gone.
Really liking these Bridge cards. Nothing like the super thick behemoth Poker decks. Will make the rotation. Going to bring a setup to the Piss'd N Broke meetup for folks to try out.
ThinkingFold
Flush
My bridge set (plus bonus set) showed up. Wow you are right about these being a totally different stock. Not sure I am a fan of how smooth they are. Height comparison between poker sized, on the left, and bridge size.
Last edited:
LOL, that was my first reaction as well.
Yes a totally different feel between the Bridge & Poker decks but IMO for the better. I think they did themselves and me a favor by switching to a thinner stock.
Much is yet to be determined such as how they hold up to play, will the print on the faces fade, will the crease or show marks over time. But at least my hands will not be as sore shuffling and dealing.
Got mine today, upon initial inspection I like them a lot more than the poker sized cards. The stock feels more smooth, and not as thick as I recall (although I sold off my poker sized decks). The card stock is a huge improvement I think. They feel almost like a thicker KEM? Not nearly as slippery as most plastic cards.
Looking forward to getting them in play.
Looking forward to getting them in play.
Actually I think the rougher surface texture on most card stocks (save maybe KEMs) makes them even more slippery/slick. There is more surface area for friction to act on with a smoother finish.
justsomedude
Straight Flush
New Faded Spade bridge/jumbo (L) compared to new DESjGN cards bridge/jumbo (R). Pretty damn close...
bsdunbar1
4 of a Kind
I'm not a fan of the Faded Spade cards, have a deck and have never used them.
Maybe the design is just too non-traditional for me. (n) :thumbsdown:
Maybe the design is just too non-traditional for me. (n) :thumbsdown:
justsomedude
Straight Flush
FWIW... the graphics are A LOT smaller on the bridge/jumbo cards, because the art is squished down into the middle area. Not that it makes the art any better, but it does make it less obtrusive...
justsomedude
Straight Flush
Looks like these guys are the new card for PokerGo as well. I wonder how they're getting all these premiere showcase opportunities.
From last night's 'Open House' episode...
Maybe Cary Katz owns Faded Spade too?
From last night's 'Open House' episode...
Maybe Cary Katz owns Faded Spade too?
Yep, as I mentioned somewhere they are also now used on Live at the Bike.
Perhaps it's the attitude of the company. In reading their website it seems like they are poker enthusiasts vs all of the other major card manufacturers who probably don't specifically care where their cards are put in use. Maybe Faded Spade is more willing to work with the big guns like the WPT and Poker Go for tweaking designs and making their RFID better. Just a thought.
iconredesign
New Member
Those seem to be Cartamundi RFID cards to help run the live streaming software so they could show the hole cards - IIRC it's only sold to casinos and these big event organizers so fat chance of picking one up for the home games. Shame, because the faces look kinda cool IMO.
But yeah, I have no horse in the race that is the RFID deck industry, but I believe the poker size is just for the space that can accommodate the electronics, that and poker size sorta looks better on screen?
Create an account or login to comment
You must be a member in order to leave a comment
Create account
Create an account and join our community. It's easy!
Log in
Already have an account? Log in here.
