Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Volvo XC90 vs MB M Class vs Acura MDX vs Lexus RX 350 vs BMW X5 vs Cadillac SRX



  • adp3adp3 Posts: 446
    has there really been no buzz about the SRX? Should we be expecting any yet, given the car's expected release date?
  • wwestwwest Posts: 10,706
    It's a Cadillac, the older folks luxury vehicle, you want "buzz" out of that crowd, find a shovel, or better yet a backhoe.
  • I have never thought of the RX300 as a SUV designed for women, but I must admit you did make some good points. I can see why reliability is more important to female because I know how much my wife hates bringing the car in for preventative maintenance.
    Perhaps the new ML320 can compete with the RX in the female buyer market. It would have to be more reliable that its predecessor and oh yea, and it would have to have a big center consoles and a place for a purse.
  • steverstever Posts: 52,683
    Do Acura dealers usually drive BMW's? The member you are wondering about has posted here (occasionally) since '01 - I think we would've caught on by now if soliciting was involved.

    Not everyone who has kind words to say about Honda (or Volvo) is a dealer or marketing maven :-)

    Steve, Host
  • clemboclembo Posts: 253
    You as the host are correct, I'm a very frequent reader of the Edmunds boards but I'm only an occasional writer. This SUV board was helpful for me when I was going through the decision making process that ultimately lead to an MDX for my wife. I would much rather read and write about my other cars, both of which are more fun to drive than any SUV but much less practical.

    Keep up the good work as the board host, this is an interesting place to visit mainly due to the quality of the board members/posters.
  • adp3adp3 Posts: 446
    Hey, Steve - I said I didn't doubt whether Clembo is a real person

    I was just casting doubt on the whole message board posting phenomenon.
  • orwoodyorwoody Posts: 269
    There is a real person behind every message here it's the information we post that is difficult to validate or verify... and funny thing is our opinions taint how we interpret the messages.

    Believe it or not there are a lot of auto executives and even dealers that drive other mfrs vehicles. They do this to compare their vehicles; better features, worse features, understand why so many people bought the other guys vehicles.
    I like the direction Cadillac has taken and they've been doing pretty good at execution the last few years... and they've started making some products those of us not yet retired are interested in. Neither the RX300 or BMW X5 hit my needs or soft spot(as well as a number of others) and I ended up in Denali.
  • fndlyfmrflyrfndlyfmrflyr Posts: 668
    GM isn't making anything this retiree wants. Just because one is retired doesn't mean we stop wanting something fun, comfortable, and reliable to drive.

    Hope the SRX is better than current offerings.
  • eaton53eaton53 Posts: 356
    "GM isn't making anything this retiree wants."

    I'm sure GM would be very pleased to hear that. The new performance oriented Cadillacs are not being marketed to retirees.

    The others here have their own deficiencies.... quality problems afflicting the M-Class and BMW (with it's Focus-like recall totals), the BMW's lack of utility, the RX and MDX's use of cheap appliance vehicles as their basis.
  • So the new performance oriented Cadillacs are not being marketed to retirees, I wonder what their target population is. In the old days, most of Cadillacs are driven by retirees, isn't Cadillac foolish for alienating the retirees before it can gain some other population group to replace them.
    I still think the high end Cadillacs are aim at middle age people and retirees, but the low end Cadillacs are a big question mark. They are definitely not aim at the retirees, younger people cannot afford them because Cadillac didnt lower the price enough. The middle age group finds the low end Cadillac cheaply made. Not in the true tradition of a Cadillac. I guess that is why Cadillac had problem selling the low end model since the 70s. The horsepower may have gone up, but unfortunately, not much else has change.
  • eaton53eaton53 Posts: 356
    Is in their late '40's to late '50's, people who are in their peak earning years. Targeting retirees is for Lincoln and Buick (and increasingly, Toyota).

    The true tradition of Cadillac is going bye-bye. The new tradition is high performance and bold styling.... XLR and SRX are getting rave reviews and they're not luxoboat iso-chambers for geriatrics.

    As for selling the low end.... seems to no longer be a problem. CTS is the 2nd best selling sports sedan in the near lux class, it's passed the Mercedes C-Class and trails only the 3-Series, on pace to sell 60K units this year.
  • fndlyfmrflyrfndlyfmrflyr Posts: 668
    This retiree still likes cars that are fun to drive and has always required a car be practical too. We were one of the first ones to drive the local dealer's CTS when it first came out. We were split on the look, but agreed the CTS interior needed work.

    I didn't fit in back (lack of head room), too many hard surfaces where one expects soft, off center seating in front, small trunk, and more. Tried an STS and it felt like an old car Also found the front seats hurt my back. Like the DTS, but it is too big to fit in my garage. The dolled up SUV had an unusable third row and it was hard to get in and out, though it did accelerate quite well.

    I have noticed the CTS is selling well enough that some dealers are now selling them with inflated priced aftermarket parts already installed.

    The '04 CTS with the larger engine and some interior refinements should sell well.
  • Near 60000 unit sold a year for a American car is a terrible number. I see that as a major problem, although personally I think Cadillac is going the right direction with its emphasis on performance, but they really need to improve on quality of components and quality control over all. They also seem to have taken a design cue from Nissan. The XLR and SRX are radical design that only a hand full of people can appreciate.
    As a comparison, Toyota Camry sold 450000 units in 2002 and the Honda Accord sold 400000 units. Looks like the CTS have a long way to go.
  • rerenov8rrerenov8r Posts: 380
    The CTS is not at all like the Accord or Camry, frankly it is not even like the TL or ES (the Acura & Lex upmarket FWD sporty sedans). It is bigger and less "boy racer" than the IS and totally different in character than any Infinity.

    Personally I feel it somewhere near a non-quatro Audi or the older MB C class, but still different. It is not quite as nicely finished, and lacks that last little bit of Autobahn solidness, but things are moving in the right direction...

    If the SRX reviews match the production version things could get very interesting.
  • eaton53eaton53 Posts: 356
    Is a high number for a RWD sports sedan, only the 3-Series is outselling it. By comparison, the Lexus IS is selling less than 20K units.

    GM has projected 30K sales for the SRX, probably because the initial offering is all high end V-8 AWD units. But once the lower priced V-6 models come out, I expect that forecast to get blown away.
  • wulf007wulf007 Posts: 20
    Local dealer tells me the SRX isn't scheduled to be delivered to his dealership until November. Also says first models will be 3.6 not V8-AWD version, which will be out later (don't know how much later). Also Cadillac has told dealers there will be little room to negotiate MSRP. Finally, this dealership had a nicely equipped SRX with V8, but not fully loaded, in their shop for viewing and training. MSRP $58K. I am not so sure they will sell 30,000 units at those prices. BTW, I've now had two separate sales reps familiar with both SRX and Escalade from to different dealerships tell me Escalade is a better buy of the two.
  • eaton53eaton53 Posts: 356
    If you value the speed and handling prowess of a sports sedan combined with excellent utility, then the SRX is the preferred vehicle.

    If you want brute force (but not great speed - the SRX will blow its doors off) full size or need to tow, then pick the Escalade.
  • wulf007wulf007 Posts: 20
    As a matter of fact I do want the extra room and yes, I do tow and hit the slopes often. But in case you hadn't notice there are a lot of cross-overs that have some sports car handling and some utility (fx45, Porsche Cayennne, among others). But they don't have enough handling or utility to do either as well as a vehicle specifically designed for those purposes. At close $60K I could get a base 3.6 CTS and a 4Runner or JGC 4X4 and have both. I was actually waiting for the SRX to replace my existing SUV but having seen it I guess I am not as impressed as others. The SRX may be a fine vehicle but I already have a performance car so I think I will take the Escalade and pocket the difference in cash. It'll help pay for the newly tripled car registration fees.
  • Yes you are right, the The CTS is not at all like the TL or ES. The TL and the ES are much better build and the components are of higher quality. The CTS has a powerful engine, but not as powerful as the TL type S, and the Acura engine is much more reliable. You compare the CTS to the Audi or the older MB C, the funny thing is that the TL Type S out perform both of those cars. When I test drove the 2002 CTS, the finish of the interior was typical cheap GM and lots of designs, interior and exterior was questionable, the list price was 29000, but an CTS equipped with the very basics will cost at least 35000.
    Cadillac always project high numbers for their new cars for the sake of the share holders. The CTS did not live up to its promise, the same will happen with the SRX, personally, I think they set their goals too high. I would prefer a Escalade over the SRX. The Escalade is well build and uses high quality components. The SRX promise speed, but the body design is tall and narrow without roll over controls, not a very good combination for speed.
  • eaton53eaton53 Posts: 356
    Is a sporty car, not a sports sedan. When they come up with a proper RWD sports sedan, then it's a player.... but Honda seems to have no interest in doing it right, just putting out Accord variants based on a cheap FWD platform.

    The ES is a Camry with a nice interior, in no way resembling a sports sedan. Comparison would be with a base DeVille, except with a weak V-6 instead of the powerful Northstar. Basically trading some better interior bits (Lexus) for a far superior powertrain (Caddy). I'll take the power.

    GM projected 30K sales for the CTS.... it has blown that away by double, so all expectations have been met and then some. 30K sales forecast for the SRX is a conservative number that will likely be exceeded.

    Also, you are speculating the the CL will be more reliable. Not provable, as the CTS is too new to have any statistical evidence, but Cadillac has been right up there in Powers' long term reliability surveys for quite some time. The difference between Cadillac and the Japanese makes has been a few hundredths of a defect... an inconsequential amount.

    The CTS owners group here at Edmund's have had very few issues and are very pleased with them.
  • wwestwwest Posts: 10,706
    are DEAD, it's just that they don't get it yet!
  • andrewtran71andrewtran71 Posts: 840
    My cousin (a guy) just bought a RX330. I joked around and said it was a girly car, unlike the manly MDX.
    He didn't find that amusing at all.
    The question is, are there just more women drivers than men?
  • wwestwwest Posts: 10,706
    live longer than us, by about ten years on the average, so, yes, there are more of them.
  • wulf007wulf007 Posts: 20
    A good friend had a Jeep Grand Cherokee, pretty well decked out, which he just traded in for an RX330. Up to the trade in it was "his" SUV. After that it quickly became his "wife's car" although he drove it more than she did. I suspect he just did not want to take the ribbing from the rest of us neandrathals with real ground pounders. Funny thing is though that I know three single women who just bought SUV's, one 4runner, one Escalade and one Highlander. Two of them traded in an SUV for a newer SUV. None of them liked the RX330 cause they said it was a girly car or too cutesy. I never thought about it since an RX330 doesn't fit my needs but that seems to be the general consensus.
  • eaton53eaton53 Posts: 356
    A few years back, a guy actually admitted on the Ford Usenet newsgroup that he traded a SVT Cobra in on a New Beetle.

    Talk about a merciless mocking... like where did he find a doctor that could remove all of the testosterone from his body???
  • Do you think the difference between a sports car and a sport sedan is FWD vs RWD? There is alot more difference between the two distinctions. Usually a sedan has 4 doors and it can be FWD or RWD or AWD. I dont think anybody would rule a car out just because it is a FWD or a RWD car. Personally, I think front wheel has a lot of advantage over RWD, better foul weather traction and less chance of a spin out during acceleration. Basically, it is easier to pull a car than to push one. With the new generation of FWD cars, they have almost eliminated the torque steering problem. The RL and ES are no doubt sedans not sport cars, the Aurca NSX is a sports car. I am not sure what you were trying to get at when you say the ES does not campare to CTS and should be compare to the Deville. The Deville is a much better car than the CTS and cost 15000 more. Therefore, the ES must be a much better car than CTS as well.
    You stated "GM projected 30K sales for the CTS.... it has blown that away by double." If that was true, that would make the CTS the number #1 selling car in any given year. Just wondering, which year did the CTS sold 600000 units?
    As far as relieability, J.D. Power have alway rated Acura and Lexus higher than Cadillac. One test drive of the TL, ES and the CTS will reveal how cheaply made the CTS is. Other than the engine itself, the CTS really have nothing going for itself.
  • andrewtran71andrewtran71 Posts: 840
    Oh, yeah. I would pick Acura or Lexus over Cadillac anyday.
    Wasn't there a saying that goes, "Cadillac is a 'poor' person's Mercedes or Lexus?"
    Not that Cadillac is inexpensive!
    I think that new Cadillac Sedan looks kind of cool though--you know the one they used on the LA chase scene in the movie "Matrix Reloaded" ?
  • wulf007wulf007 Posts: 20
    According to the latest JD Power Initial Quality Survey Lexus was first, Cadillac second, and Acura was 4th . And the CTS is selling better than projected although I am not sure it will reach 60k units. It will probably sell more units than the ES which I read somewhere was about 20,000 (not sure about the accuracy of that number). The SRX is projected at 30K units but I am not sure they will reach that number either at an average cost of $50K. Yes, I know the base price is $38k with a 3.6 six. But add a few options likes tires and a steering wheel and the price goes up in a hurry. I've had a Lexus and the car was reliable and the service superior. But honestly I have had more fun in my JGC which I am trading in on a new SUV. Two different vehicles for two different purposes I know, so maybe not a fair comparison. I don't own a CTS but I am glad a domestic manufacturer is finally giving us choices and challenging the Japanese - German manufacturers.
  • I did a comparison of the ES, TL and CTS for best in reliability on the J D Power site below

    The result were: #1 Acura TL, #2 Lexus ES300 and #3 CTS.
  • steverstever Posts: 52,683
    "Cadillac, like Chrysler and other manufacturers, seems intent on going back to rear-wheel drive for increased power and the traditional feeling of hang-out-the-rear handling — and with little regard to those of us who must also confront winter driving conditions, it must be added — but the SRX offers all-wheel drive along with rear-wheel drive."

    Cadillac hits the SUV mark with SRX (Duluth Budgeteer News)

    Steve, Host
Sign In or Register to comment.