I didn't mean to attack the messenger - I agree that ad hominem attacks are inappropriate (and morally indefensible). I simply meant to determine if the writer had credibility. I was hoping that other readers could fill me in. Perhaps the words I chose were not perfect.
I meant no offense to baron, unless, of course, he is a poseur.
adp3- If you would be so kind, challenge my information by all means, but not me. And no I was not offended in anway, nor am I a poseur.
I'm in my second year of secondary school that's not secret, and whether by primary or secondary sources I do get a lot of information on the happenings at Cadillac before others. Whether or not you believe me is simply your choice. And no I was not "opining" either. Opining implies stating an opinion or a fallacy. I can assure you it was neither.
As for SRXs actually being sold at near invoice prices, I assure you it is happening; we were offered a V8 AWD at $1500 over invoice. The wheeling and dealing is taking place now, not six months from now as normally happens with a new product.
I was offered a SRX $500 over invoice today in Illinois. Unfortunately, the car reminds we to much of a "station wagon" and not an SUV. I suspect Cadillac is going to have problems selling 30,000 of these vehicles. Women will like the looks more so than men. It handles well and has great performance features, but it just looks like a ladies station wagon and not a beefy SUV. Just my 2 cents.
The Lexus RX could quite possibly be the most ugly chick car ever to hit the planet (both the old and new). If men would take control of the keys again, and buy what THEY want, then I can see the SRX pushing 60k units a year.
Lexus as a whole wouldn't exist if it wasn't for women and rich guys in bad pants who play a lot of golf.
if the guys had their way, we'd all be standing around in the service departments while our BMWs and Porshces were being fixed, as we watched our kids' college funds being slowly drained
my point, baron, is that information is only as good as the source of the information
if your dad was a GM exec, then your info is good (though there would be other credibility concerns, of course)
glad to hear you are not a poseur
the faxct that you are in secondary school really isn't all that relevant to my questioning your credibility (though I did, wrongly, raise it), as I have known many kids your age (including myself) who knew a lot more than folks twice my age ever did or ever will - so more power to you, and keep up the good work
If you want provide comments on the merits or shortcomings of those "big fat bloated purses on wheels" you're personally invited to post them here: I don't like SUVs, why do you?
I sat in a silver V8 4x4 SRX - 54K. ouch! I thought the exterior was beautifully done, though I could do without that third row seat and thus be happier if the vehicle were somewhat shorter - but that's minor. The extended sunroof was terrific. I'm going to trust that the dynamics are great and that most of the good things I've read are true.
However, the interior is disappointing. I've read countless times that GM is going to put more emphasis and $ into quality interiors, but I haven't seen any evidence of it. Who wants to be surrounded by cheap materials in a $50K+ machine? And if you don't believe the interior of the SRX falls WAY short, take a look at any competitor. The interior, in part, comes right out of the CTS, which continues to suffer this same complaint from owners, admirers and detractors. Admittedly, this particular vehicle came without the wood dash trim (shouldn't make a difference)and was in gray (may make a difference).
I still hope it's successful, and that mine is a very minority opinion. I wanted to love this car.
I agree with you that the SRX interior is based on the CTS but I felt it was more refined and seemed to have nicer materials. It is just too "station wagon" for me but still a nice vehicle.
I agree the "fashion" part of the interior, definitely not its functionality in any way, is SRX's biggest short-coming. However, if one gets the Nav system, then that entire HAL-like center stack gets covered in wood, which really improves the interior IMO.
The interior materials in the vehicle aren't actually cheap. They just somehow conspire to make it look cheap. For instance, what appears to be plastic with that weird grain pattern on the dash and door panels is actually a new synthetic material, that's essentially a fabric. Still, I think something more like the XLR's interior treatment would be a big step in the right direction.
That said, the leather, wood, switchgear, etc., in SRX is still of better quality than anything else GM has (with the exception of XLR). And it doesn't rattle! Thank god. Our '01 DTS hasn't had a single quality problem, except that after about two years the dash above the gauges started rattling on bumpy roads.
Nevertheless, I think the functionality and excellent and efficient use of space in the SRX, as well as UltraView, more than makes up for the interior's "fashionability" shortfalls.
sat in a silver one last night. it is actually very attractive. not as aggressive looking as I had hoped but not feminine looking at all. it will look terrific in black.
When i looked in the backseat i thought to myself that it didn't look like there was that much legroom. When I actually sat in the seat it was great. The backseat is high off the floor for theater seating. And my knees didn't touch the back fo the front seat. And I am 6'8"!! Much more legroom than a Tahoe. The SRX i sat in had the the big moonroof and the right side of my head touched the roof. A vehicle without the big roof would give me more headroom. Very nice vehicle. They will start getting the V6's in November.
Just test drove a V8 AWD -really fast and smooth. It has just enough height to look down on traffic, but not feel tippy. Lots of room inside, especially with 2nd and 3rd row folded. Not cheap (51k sticker), but very distinctive in the metalflake charcoal color. I think they've got this one right where they want it. It drove like a 5 series wagon with 8 inches of ground clearance.
I've got 500 miles done and this is a really fun car to drive. After spending a week in my friends X5 4.4 and then a week in my new SRX I can say without a doubt, the SRX out handles the X5 in nearly every way. It's smoother, faster, quieter, and more comfortable front and back. The magnetic suspension is amazing. Hit rough RR tracks at 45 and all you feel or hear is a mild reminder that you're driving. Toss it into a turn at 40 and it stays flat! It is too bad that all that technology is hidden...I like more information on the dash than a temp and fuel gage. No trip odometer (or anything else)without punching touch screen...I don't want one piece of info at a time to scroll through...give me all of it to look at. Bottom line for me, this is a great 21st century vehicle with a dash and gage cluster better suited for a Chevy Impala. I do really like this car, but it should have (and could have)been better if I had designed the interior.
Thanks for the support, my friends still think I'm nuts for buying a new Cadillac, actually I'm leasing it The 36 month residual value is 54% so I'm only buying 46% of the car. They drive BMWs and they still don't believe the SRX will turn out to be a world class car...Time will tell but I think its got more technology quality and style than people think. Does anyone else have one yet???
MY wife and I drove a loaded V8 last weekend. The handling and ride were so tight, reminded me of my test drive in the BMW 528. Seats were very firm. Drives much tighter than my 9-5 Saab wagon, roomier too.
Ultraview was out of this world. My wife came home and said, "I want one". The problem is it replaces my car! Only disappointment was that the third row only fits people less than 5 foot 2 comfortably. However, that second row fits giants. I had the drivers seat all the way back yet I fit behind it (6'3" all legs).
V8 was very powerful, but will wait to try a V6 in an effort to not use all the hydrocarbons left on the planet. Also debating AWD vs RWD. While we live in suburban NYC, we don't drive to work and the Saab with traction control has worked admirably in all our snow. ( and yes gets 20mpg at 80mph!) Any thoughts on this?
In the November Car and Driver, the Cadillac SRX placed first and won the comparo which was to find the "porsche of SUVs". This is the first first-place finish for any Cadillac vehicle in a comparo in several decades, as far as I know. Ironically, the Cayenne was beaten by the Caddy in the comparo. Here's the breakdown:
They said the Cadillac artfully confined the ultimate in sport, interior functionality, utility, etc., etc. And that the reason it came in first is because it did everything well, and had no major flaw in any error that someone would look for. They went on to say that if it were a little cheaper, it would be one of the great automotive runaway sucess stories. Again, they were very impressed at the fact that this type of Cadillac existed, let alone stole the crown from the Porsche, being a recent arrival to the performance engineering scene.
Great to see real good Cadillacs being built again. In my life I have only heard of the old great Caddy's of the past. I now feel like I'm seeing what people may well call the renesance. of Cadillac.
...of finding a fantastic deal on a 3-year old SRX in 2007! The only way I'll be able to afford one of these is if typically weak Cadillac residuals come into play -- and with a #1 rating in C&D and strong reviews everwhere else, that's looking more and more remote.
Come on, Consumer Reports, help me out here before JD Power goes and blows it for me !!!
Great Job Cadillac! Delighted to see GM actually get it right the first time. With only two real American car companies left, they (the BIG 2) need to excel at everything they produce! This is a ray of hope. Can't wait to see and sit in one at the Charlotte Auto Show this thursday!
2018 VW Passat SE w/tech, 2016 Audi Q5 Premium Plus w/tech, 2006 Acura TL w/nav
The Car and Driver article is remarkable in the fact that the last comparison that I remember Cadillac winning was 10 years ago. One of the major car mags put the 1993 Allante w/Northstar V8 against the aging Mercedes 560SL. The Cadillac won, but the win would be short lived. The Allante was already scheduled for termination since it was 7 years old with no replacement in the wings and the platform it was based on (1986-91 Eldorado/Toronado) was already discontinued. And the 560SL was replaced in 1994 by a far superior car that has only been recently replaced by the current SL.
Regardless, winning a C/D test is huge since Cadillac historically never done very well with this publication (or any of the others). Hopefully, they won't rest on their laurels and work on the interior upgrades that Bob Lutz promised.
I HAVE NOW DRIVEN THE V8 AND V6 SRX. I JUST DROVE THE V6 TODAY AND FOUND IT TO BE AWSOME. FOR ME, THE POWER IS MORE THAN ADEQUITE AND IT HANDLES QUITE NICELY. I LIKE THE DIFFERENCE IN PRICE AS WELL AS THE COUPLE MORE MPG IN THE V6 MODEL. I DROVE THE RWD BUT WOULD BUY THE WAD. I THINK IT LOOKS BETTER IN THE DARKER COLORS. THE VEHICLE IS A BUT LARGER (LONGER) THAN I EXPECTED. I'M NOW CHECKING TO SEE WHETHER THIS VEHICLE IN INCLUDED IN THE "GM BUCKS" PROGRAM. CADILLAC DID A GOOD JOB WITH THIS MODEL.
I have seen the SRX and some of its competitors interior and the fit and finish is equal. The materials may be a step below the others, maybe, but the fitting of these materials is top notch.
Toronto area residents can see the SRX at the BCE Place (King & Bay). They have a Light Platinum with Ebony interior V8 RWD equipped with the Ultra View roof. It's open, so you can see how the front and back fit. I can now understand C&D's earlier complaint about the wide door sills.
The spokesperson said it would be there all this week, and that they should be in the showrooms at the end of the month. Brochures will be available mid-month.
I have heard this from several posters. It is not a long vehicle. 195". A few inches longer than the CTS. 3" inches longer than a Trailblazer. To put it into perspective, the Chevy Camaro was a 193". The Olds Intrigue 195". The Chevy Impala 200". The SRX is 20" shorter than a full size GM wagon of the 70's and 80's. With the same 116" long wheelbase. I think the fact that the SRX is not tall makes it appear longer. It is also a fairly narrow vehicle.
My wife is purchasing the above for $1100 off MSRP. I EMailed three local dealers and the best was the aforementioned.I told her to wait until spring; however, she wants it now. Only extra involved was the white diamond color...which is 900 extra. I checked the Edmunds pricing, then called the dealer and confirmed everything involved. Even got the out the door price to make sure there were no "EXTRA add-ons" involved.
"this vehicle succeeds by being nearly the best vehicle in its segment in multiple areas rather than by being the best in the segment in only one or two areas"
The V8 may attract the most attention from the media, but the fact is that the commercial success of the SRX will depend on how the V6 model stacks up against the RX330, MDX, FX35, XC90, X5 3.0, etc.
I found a V6 at a local dealer, and I'm gonna try to do a test drive soon. Will give a report from a barely qualified perspective (I drive two Chrysler products, a Grand Caravan and a Sebring Convertible - so at least I can tell you all whether it's more fun to drive than those)
The SRX looks like a station wagon which might be a turnoff for a lot of potential buyer even though it has a potent V8 under the hood. People these days don't want station wagons. Why did Caddy went soft on this one? Couldn't some of the Escalade gene trickled down into this poser of an SUV?
VW wagons, Audi wagons, Subarus - all are up (especially when you correct the stats for the impact of the recession)
Volvo went crossover Daimler-Chrysler went crossover
maybe what you are saying is you wish Cadillac had gone more the direction of Nissan with the Infiniti FXs or Porsche and VW with the Cayenne/Touraeg. I can't disagree with you. I guess the market will tell us what people want.
I know the SRX is more what I want than the Cayenne/Touraeg, and more what I want than the Audi/VW wagons or the Subies or the Volvo XC wagon.
I like the edginess of the Cadillac, and the performance. And I don't want something that drives like a truck.
I could not disagree with the station wagon comments more. The Infiniti is not even close to what I want, the utility value is low, the ride is like rocks and the styling screams testerone. While I am all for testerone, its not always good to show it. The Toureg is way too heavy, slow and only seats 5. Face it, the SUV's are tall station wagons with some truck capabilities, but not always the amount of utility needed.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with a station wagon, only our culture's need to elevate ourselves by trashing others. Housewife image hurt wagons, Soccer mom image did it to minivans, soon there will be an SUV equivalent. People do want station wagons, its just the image problem many are stuck with. It is too bad that vehicle choices get muddied with society's image of who drives what. It's the old saying, "You are what you drive."
(FYI I have two station wagons, an American luxoboat and a european sport wagon. Together they meet every need I have. I am not a mom, housewife, soccer parent or anything close to the above.)
Comments
I meant no offense to baron, unless, of course, he is a poseur.
If you would be so kind, challenge my information by all means, but not me. And no I was not offended in anway, nor am I a poseur.
I'm in my second year of secondary school that's not secret, and whether by primary or secondary sources I do get a lot of information on the happenings at Cadillac before others. Whether or not you believe me is simply your choice. And no I was not "opining" either. Opining implies stating an opinion or a fallacy. I can assure you it was neither.
As for SRXs actually being sold at near invoice prices, I assure you it is happening; we were offered a V8 AWD at $1500 over invoice. The wheeling and dealing is taking place now, not six months from now as normally happens with a new product.
Lexus as a whole wouldn't exist if it wasn't for women and rich guys in bad pants who play a lot of golf.
if the guys had their way, we'd all be standing around in the service departments while our BMWs and Porshces were being fixed, as we watched our kids' college funds being slowly drained
if your dad was a GM exec, then your info is good (though there would be other credibility concerns, of course)
glad to hear you are not a poseur
the faxct that you are in secondary school really isn't all that relevant to my questioning your credibility (though I did, wrongly, raise it), as I have known many kids your age (including myself) who knew a lot more than folks twice my age ever did or ever will - so more power to you, and keep up the good work
tidester, host
I thought the exterior was beautifully done, though I could do without that third row seat and thus be happier if the vehicle were somewhat shorter - but that's minor. The extended sunroof was terrific. I'm going to trust that the dynamics are great and that most of the good things I've read are true.
However, the interior is disappointing. I've read countless times that GM is going to put more emphasis and $ into quality interiors, but I haven't seen any evidence of it. Who wants to be surrounded by cheap materials in a $50K+ machine? And if you don't believe the interior of the SRX falls WAY short, take a look at any competitor. The interior, in part, comes right out of the CTS, which continues to suffer this same complaint from owners, admirers and detractors. Admittedly, this particular vehicle came without the wood dash trim (shouldn't make a difference)and was in gray (may make a difference).
I still hope it's successful, and that mine is a very minority opinion. I wanted to love this car.
The interior materials in the vehicle aren't actually cheap. They just somehow conspire to make it look cheap. For instance, what appears to be plastic with that weird grain pattern on the dash and door panels is actually a new synthetic material, that's essentially a fabric. Still, I think something more like the XLR's interior treatment would be a big step in the right direction.
That said, the leather, wood, switchgear, etc., in SRX is still of better quality than anything else GM has (with the exception of XLR). And it doesn't rattle! Thank god. Our '01 DTS hasn't had a single quality problem, except that after about two years the dash above the gauges started rattling on bumpy roads.
Nevertheless, I think the functionality and excellent and efficient use of space in the SRX, as well as UltraView, more than makes up for the interior's "fashionability" shortfalls.
it is actually very attractive.
not as aggressive looking as I had hoped
but not feminine looking at all.
it will look terrific in black.
When i looked in the backseat i thought
to myself that it didn't look like there
was that much legroom.
When I actually sat in the seat it was great.
The backseat is high off the floor for theater seating.
And my knees didn't touch the back fo the front seat. And I am 6'8"!!
Much more legroom than a Tahoe.
The SRX i sat in had the the big moonroof and the right side of my head touched the roof.
A vehicle without the big roof would give me
more headroom.
Very nice vehicle.
They will start getting the V6's in November.
craig
At 34, I wouldn't hesitate to buy a Cadillac CTS or SRX. I've never been one to follow the crowd though.
Plus it's had lots of problems.
Cadillac is on a roll -- eventually others will jump on the band wagon, but for now enjoy being unique!
Ultraview was out of this world. My wife came home and said, "I want one". The problem is it replaces my car! Only disappointment was that the third row only fits people less than 5 foot 2 comfortably. However, that second row fits giants. I had the drivers seat all the way back yet I fit behind it (6'3" all legs).
V8 was very powerful, but will wait to try a V6 in an effort to not use all the hydrocarbons left on the planet. Also debating AWD vs RWD. While we live in suburban NYC, we don't drive to work and the Saab with traction control has worked admirably in all our snow. ( and yes gets 20mpg at 80mph!) Any thoughts on this?
1. Cadillac SRX V-8.......189 points
2. Porsche Cayenne........185
3. Infinit FX45...........184
4. Volkswagen Touareg.....171
They said the Cadillac artfully confined the ultimate in sport, interior functionality, utility, etc., etc. And that the reason it came in first is because it did everything well, and had no major flaw in any error that someone would look for. They went on to say that if it were a little cheaper, it would be one of the great automotive runaway sucess stories. Again, they were very impressed at the fact that this type of Cadillac existed, let alone stole the crown from the Porsche, being a recent arrival to the performance engineering scene.
Steve, Host
All good!
Come on, Consumer Reports, help me out here before JD Power goes and blows it for me !!!
2018 VW Passat SE w/tech, 2016 Audi Q5 Premium Plus w/tech, 2006 Acura TL w/nav
Regardless, winning a C/D test is huge since Cadillac historically never done very well with this publication (or any of the others). Hopefully, they won't rest on their laurels and work on the interior upgrades that Bob Lutz promised.
The spokesperson said it would be there all this week, and that they should be in the showrooms at the end of the month. Brochures will be available mid-month.
It is not a long vehicle.
195".
A few inches longer than the CTS. 3" inches longer than a Trailblazer.
To put it into perspective, the Chevy Camaro was a 193".
The Olds Intrigue 195". The Chevy Impala 200".
The SRX is 20" shorter than a full size GM wagon of the 70's and 80's.
With the same 116" long wheelbase.
I think the fact that the SRX is not tall makes it appear longer. It is also a fairly narrow vehicle.
Full Test: 2004 Cadillac SRX
Steve, Host
VW wagons, Audi wagons, Subarus - all are up (especially when you correct the stats for the impact of the recession)
Volvo went crossover
Daimler-Chrysler went crossover
maybe what you are saying is you wish Cadillac had gone more the direction of Nissan with the Infiniti FXs or Porsche and VW with the Cayenne/Touraeg. I can't disagree with you. I guess the market will tell us what people want.
I know the SRX is more what I want than the Cayenne/Touraeg, and more what I want than the Audi/VW wagons or the Subies or the Volvo XC wagon.
I like the edginess of the Cadillac, and the performance. And I don't want something that drives like a truck.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with a station wagon, only our culture's need to elevate ourselves by trashing others. Housewife image hurt wagons, Soccer mom image did it to minivans, soon there will be an SUV equivalent. People do want station wagons, its just the image problem many are stuck with. It is too bad that vehicle choices get muddied with society's image of who drives what. It's the old saying, "You are what you drive."
(FYI I have two station wagons, an American luxoboat and a european sport wagon. Together they meet every need I have. I am not a mom, housewife, soccer parent or anything close to the above.)