Cadillac SRX

libertycat · April 2003

Anyone interested in the upcoming Cadillac SRX? It looks as sporty as the CTS and the interior looks beautiful with the pretty leather and wood trim. I hope it sells even better than the Lexus RX330 and BMW X5 (even though beating even one of these models would be a huge accomplishment).

stever · April 2003

That discussion died off too:

Cadillac SRX

Maybe it's still too early? There are a couple of comparision topics still going:

Lincoln Aviator vs. Cadillac SRX

MB M-class vs Acura MDX vs Lexus RX300 vs BMW X5 vs Cadillac SRX

Steve, Host

adp3 · May 2003

I'm interested in it, but there seems to be little discussion. I'm sure the discussion will pick up when we get closer to it being in showrooms

stever · May 2003

I'll ask KH to think about moving it to Future Vehicles; maybe that'll help.

Steve, Host

oldsman01 · May 2003

I like the looks of the SRX alot and I'm not a big SUV person. The initial reviews of it are pretty good and being built on the CTS platform should make it quite a performer. I think once both the V6 and V8 models are available, Cadillac should have no problem selling them. Performance wise, it will be interesting to see how the SRX compares with the X5 as the X is one of the best performing SUVs. To me, the SRX with the V8 is money much better spent than on the mammouth Escalade.

dindak · May 2003

"because they KNOW they will have no problems"

All cars have problems and Lexus has certainly had some, just less.

adp3 · May 2003

the initial reports on MPG for the rwd version were impressive - like 26 mpg highway

I wonder if it drove like a dog, however

it'd be nice if the AWD version got over 22 mpg

stever · May 2003

The Cadillac SRX crossover sport-utility vehicle will start at less than $40,000, according to the WSJ today.

Steve, Host

odman · May 2003

SRX starts at $37,995 for the V6 and $46,300 for the V8. Note: these are for the RWD models only -- AWD is optional.

Does anyone have any idea what the residual values will be on these 3 or 4 years out? ALG (Auto Leasing Guide) sets these, but I haven't seen any SRX quotes yet.

odman · May 2003

I wanted some good quality images of the SRX so I searched on Google and got a good link here:

http://www.speedycars.net/wallpaper/cadillac_srx.html

odman · May 2003

So far, the auto press is very positive on the SRX. I can't wait to get a chance to see it and drive it in person (seeing it at NAIAS was not quite the same as seeing it on the street).

I haven't seen an Edmunds review of the SRX yet (please post when it comes) but the other mainstream publications published previews in March. Automobile magazine doesn't have an active link, but C&D and R&T do.

Car and Driver:
http://www.caranddriver.com/article.asp?section_id=19&article- _id=4189&page_number=1

Road and Track:
http://www.roadandtrack.com/article.asp?section_id=6&article_- id=450&page_number=1

dindak · May 2003

Cadillac is on a roll and the SRX reviews are extremely positive indeed. I saw the SRX at the Toronto Auto show and it was very nice and certainly makes a bold styling statement.

stever · May 2003

Car_man over in Lease Questions - Ask Here might know.

Steve, Host

odman · May 2003

When I was in Detroit, three vehicles blew me away, and two were Cadillacs: the just-for-show Sixteen and the SRX (the other I liked was the Mustang). It's the first time I've put a Cadillac as my wallpaper on my computer!

I think that the SRX will do very well, even here in Canada where luxury utility sales are small relative to the US. The SRX is just the car Cadillac needs for the times. It is bold, sophisticated and refined, and shows a new era of confidence for Cadillac. The CTS has done a lot to pave the way for acceptance of the SRX both in terms of styling and performance. Let's hope that build quality remains good.

Here's a link to an Auto Week site with analysis of the pricing strategy. Cadillac is purposely pricing above the Japanese and in line with the German brands. I'm glad to see they are planning a heavy advertising blitz for it.

http://www.autoweek.com/cat_content.mv?port_code=autoweek&cat- _code=carnews&loc_code=index&content_code=08304780

rerenov8r · May 2003

I got mine today. I signed up at cadillic's web site months ago. They have sent stuff before, but that was mostly letter with features and estimated options. This poster is much more "mainstream" in that there are 'sell-it' images of real looking SRX with people in 'em and everything.

The "ultraview" skyroof looks awesome & insane at the same time -- gigantic opening could make this an option that would make folks considering a CONVERTIBLE re-think BUT it 180 degrees from Volvo's "boron steel roof", and if GM history is lingering the leaks, squeaks and malfunctions could make an Extended Warranty very popular to add-on.

Overall, I like the SRX but I wish were here NOW so that I could compare it head to head with Lexus, Acura, BMW, Porsche, Volvo models that are FOR SALE TODAY...

b4z · May 2003

Is it just me, or do you guys think the SRX will appeal more to women than to men?

rerenov8r · May 2003

That is what is driving me into pulling the trigger on a competing offer. But then my sweeie is not real typical of most women. She watches more baseball than I do and hates Lexus RX300s too.

Go figure

wulf007 · May 2003

Is anybody but me thinking Cadillac is pricing the SRX too high? With the way they bundle options it looks like an MSRP at around $50k with V8 and AWD. If it is as popular as we think it might be they won't be dealing too much. I know they are two different vehicles but for the difference in price I rather have the Escalade, bad mileage and all. Styling wise from a couple of side and rear pictures I've seen recently (admittedly not showing much detail) it looks a lot like a Buick Rendezvous. I was hot to get one but with the projected pricing and being unable to actually see one I'm thinking of going a different route. Feedback please.

rerenov8r · May 2003

The styling of the SRX is a wild card... I just cannot say for sure if it'll be a big seller.If the Caddy stores are not doing "land office business" on Day 1 for the SRX I see the price falling RAPIDLY (that has been the Caddy dealer behavior for A LONG TIME now..)

If that happens, the retained value is in the CRAPPER along with ALL THE OTHER GM SUVs...

For 50 large you ARE in some RARE AIR --Lexus, Porsche, BMW.

Even if the SRX is going to be "parity priced" with the MDX there are still concerns -- the SRX will NOT initially offer the V6, how much a fuel penalty will that V8 carry arounf, especially in AWD. Narrowness does give the SRX a bit of Rendy (or even VUE!?!) profile from the rear angle. Not the image I'd want for a vehicle that will cost DOUBLE... Options & availability could be a nightmare. If they "bundle" too much it will really turn off folks. The UltraView roof & the dvd-based Nav could be hugely expensive.

Lots of unanswered questions...

cadillac1 · June 2003

Well the V8 is a northstar. So I would not expect the mpg to be much worse than say a Deville or Seville. Also, in an autoweek test, they were getting in the high 20's mpg wise on the highway.

rcf8000 · June 2003

In the June issue of Car and Driver they give the mileage rating of the XLR as 17 city 24 highway. Since the SRX weighs a LOT more than the XLR, there is no way the V8 AWD version is going to get in the high 20s highway.

rerenov8r · June 2003

Isn't the SRX a "baby Northstart"?

But yeah, I don't think that you can gethigh 20s with anything as big (aerodynamically) as the SRX...

1487 · June 2003

Cadillac is only planning to sell 30K SRXs in a year. I dont think that will be a problem at all. The price is no more ridiculous that an X5 or ML class. If you want to compete with those vehicles than you should price your product accordingly. If you want something cheaper look at the FWD based RX330 and MDX. The SRX is a performance machine. not a subsititute for a minivan. The X5 goes up to $66K and there is no way the SRX will approach that so its still a bargain.

rerenov8r · June 2003

The MDX has done SPECTACULARLY well in both. The RX300 has VERY good sales quantity and retained value has beaten all the other SUVs (save MDX and other Toyo/Lex models).

If SRX meets the modest sales goal of 30K units then GM brass can call it success in public (but back in the board room wail about how EXPENSIVE it is to build/develop relative to other GM SUVs).

Don't get me wrong, I like the SRX and hope it is a roaring success -- I also hope that Cadillac CAN use the success of a "lower demand, high quality, high build cost" vehicle as a message to the rest of GM that they CAN take a position of leadership!

mjmorrow · June 2003

Does anyone know the release date on the SRX? I have read many articles that say June, September, 2nd Quarter 2003? Does anyone know? I am really excited to see it and test drive it. I keep checking with GMBuypower but have yet to see the addition in the system.

rerenov8r · June 2003

Origianlly the target the was 2nd Q, then they said late 2nd Q/June.

It now scheduled for an early fall intro -- maybe Sept. maybe Oct. I would be surpiresied if you see any quantity of 'em before Nov.

Really, this is probably a good thing. Demand is very soft, especially for domestics w/o incentives.
It will alos help to be sure the first ones are the very best they can be -- no rush jobs, no "the engineers didn't design in a way to attach this".

The SRX has to be as close to perfect as GM can muster if they are serious about getting MSRP or close to it.

You should check out the GM Media site. Should make the wait worth while.

Details of Pricing

fsmmcsi · June 2003

I have printed the reviews from The Car Connection, Car and Driver, Road&Track, Canadian Driver, and The Winnipeg Free Press. The Lansing State Journal on 1/5/2003 published an interesting article on the efficient factory, stating that the plant was then building test vehicles and training employees.

I pay cash for cars, and have found that obtaining bids from the fleet managers at several dealers will result in a bid at, or just above, invoice. This is especially so if you wait a few months after a new vehicle comes out.

I drive 25,000 miles or more per year in southern California, with our grooved and rough concrete freeways, so would benefit greatly from a vehicle which is smooth and quiet. I need a mid-sized SUV (or car-truck) to carry a folding ladder and other tools and test equipment. My 2002 Mercury Mountaineer is a truck - far too rough, especially with the Class III trailer package I ordered to obtain a lower rear axle ratio for better acceleration. The SRX is really a car - a somewhat tall station wagon. I suspect that a large number of people will prefer such a vehicle to a truck-based SUV, or a front wheel drive minivan (or minivan-based vehicle such as the Pacifica, MDX or RX330). The lower center of gravity, the excellent weight distribution, and the good power from the V8 will make the SRX far safer than the vastly heavier Lincoln Aviator twin of the Explorer/Mountaineer, the Lexus, or the minivan-based vehicles.

rerenov8r · June 2003

Word is that the General wants/needs to take Caddy WAY WAY upmarket -- make Cadillac = "the Pinnacle".
That WON'T happen if the dealers are "giving 'em away" at invoice, regardless of whether you pay cash, gold bullion or finance for 30 years. Nowadays it is rather difficult to get any "Luxury Imports" near invoice and I would think GM wants dealers to think the same way.

I have flat out NEVER seen an X5 with ANY sort of tools/test equipment,even the BMW Road Service techs use the 5 series wagon. While there could be folks that want the functionality of a RWD/rear based AWD SUV I think that is a TINY portion of the market. Very, very few buyers know/care that the RX300 is based on the FWD Camry platform. When comes to Pilot/MDX and its Oddy (and its Accord) heritage this is PLUS in most buyers minds, as the Oddy remains a hugely in-demand vehicle. The Pacifica is too new to "cast in stone" but I have my doubts about it -- it's poor initial sales may be due solely to option laden initial units that dealers have taken delivery on (and their stratospheric sticker price, especially in comparison to the high-value Dodge minivans...)

Finally, while I don't doubt that the SRX will be a safe vehicle, I think that it cannot hold a candle to the occupant protection of something like a Volvo or even the shear invincibility of the full size, full perimeter frame truck based SUVs. I think a majority of buyers would feel the same way.

Good luck in you quest to get an SRX at invoice, let us know how it goes.

fsmmcsi · June 2003

I agree with Rerenov8r that Cadillac needs to regain the position they once had as a top brand, and that there are still a large number of buyers who know little about cars.

However, retail and fleet sales are two very different things. The fleet guy often gets a fixed number of dollars per vehicle sold. The dealer does not need to keep it on the lot, but still gets to keep the percentage the manufacturer gives him, so he makes very good money on a fleet sale at invoice. We bought a new 2002 Mercedes C230 in April (2003) at $2,000 under invoice.

As for safety, I suggest looking at the IIHS and NSTSA web sites, where you see that several Volvo models do not do that well in the crash tests. A large SUV will offer more passive safety, but a vehicle with the handling, braking, and acceleration abilities of the SRX gives the occupants a far greater ability to entirely avoid a crash. That is why I have long argued that window stickers should contain not just the NSTSA crash resuts, but handling, braking, and acceleration test results.

As for the tools, it does seem that the Mercedes M-Class and the BMW X-5 are more fashion goods, like overpriced wrist watches. Of course, as the excellent book The Millionaire Next Door points out, the show-offs typically have lots of debt and little wealth. Cadillac has to decide if they want to target people with wealth, or people who spend big, or try to sell to both.

dindak · June 2003

Given the very successful launch of the CTS, I suspect you will see the same with the SRX. Cadillac is finally producing some competitive cars and trucks and sales are up with less incentives than other GM vehicles (Corvette as always excluded).

carnaught · June 2003

in person. They had five of them locally at a Cadillac dealer briefing. My Cadillac dealer told me where to be. I showed up at about 5:30 pm and by then the dealer reps. were gone. All five cars were locked but could be easily seen and studied. The car is nice in person, stands taller than a CTS but seems to be just the right size. The back seat looked roomy and the storage space behind the back seat looked quite adequate. The dash was very similar to the CTS but considerably nicer and more up-scale. The interior had nice textures and molded seats and seemed to have very nice fit and finish. They all had Nav. systems and one had the full panoromic moonroof, very nice. While my wife and I were looking three female "Cadillac reps" from Lansing came out to talk, introduced themselves and very congenially offered to answer any questions we had. One asked for, and took my business card, saying she'd send me more product information. They told me that the car was in production as of Aug. and would be hitting the dealers in Sept. The represented colors included silver, black, cashmire and medium to dark blue. Surprisingly, there were no white or red ones. Although I wouldn't buy one in that color, black was the nicest. The gray and black interiors seemed nicer than the light beige. They were all Northstar V8's. All in all, an impressive looking vehichle, more of a high station wagen than an SUV. One rep. told me they were marketing them as a step up from the CTS and that they handled considerably differently. BTW, they were equiped with Michelin Pilot tires.

arenn · June 2003

I was reading the Journal today and saw a GM article pitching $4000 cash back or 5 years @ 0% financing. However, I noticed that the Cadillac division was not represented here. I consider this a good sign, though I hear that there are all sorts of "conquest discounts" and the like you can pick up on the CTS. Holding the line on retail is one of the things you've got to do to boost resale value, which is something Caddy has to address if they want to be competitive with the likes of BMW. Although I think Caddy should look to boost sales, I'd keep output on some of these cars at least somewhat restricted to avoid inventory and discounted dumping problems.

wulf007 · June 2003

Talked to the manager of the local dealership where I have been dickering over a new Escalade. I wanted an SRX but when the projected price hit $50k with V8 and AWD I decided I'd rather have the Escalade for a little more $, bad mileage and all. Anyway the Manager echos rerenov8rs post #27. Cadillac wants to position itself in the high end market and would rather sell less cars at a higher price if it helps get them there. Thanks to good reviews and the new JD Power survey, they plan to move Escalade prices closer to the Lexus Gx470 and drop the SRX in the Escalades old price range. Since they are two different types of vehicle I don't know how that would work. Cadillac plans on pricing the new CTS-V also around $50k to compete with BMW M-3 and 545 and MBZ E55. Again, not sure about this strategy because not too many G35 buyers will want to spend an extra $15k or more to trade up and I don't think enough BMW or MBZ buyers will switch over. Cadillac has made great strides, but I'm not sure they are quite at the higher end BMW-MBZ level yet. But they are apparently willing to wait a couple of years to see if the strategy pays off. So unfortunately for all of us they plan to start high and stay there. Now if the economy tanks that would be another story.

nvbanker · June 2003

Cadillac is the jewel of GM, and the only think sparkling in their display case, IMO, but moving that far up-market (and they really are, by the way) may backfire. However, this is a typical GM strategy.....

How much sense does it make to re-price your cars dramatically up, in a soft economy, while running ads that say, "We're sorry for our past" ?

adp3 · June 2003

Cadillac has no prayer of selling 30,000 50K cars unless the economy makes some significant strides in the positive direction. Two years ago, Cadillac would be ramping up to sell 60,000 of these easy.

I am hoping for a positive ecnonmic turn, but if that causes Cadillac to stick to its 50k price target, I think I'll take "mild recession" for another 6 months. (Sincerest apologies to any of who might be having trouble finding work these days.)

rerenov8r · June 2003

The link I posted earlier in the thread (to the GM Medi Room announcement on SRX pricing) only mentions that the SRX will start at $37995 for RWD V6 & $46300 for RWD V8(plus $695 freight on either).

Concievably they could add A LOT of accessories/options to 37995 and keep it a) under the competition & b) under $50K... The V8 is supposed to come out first though, and I think that is a HORRIBLE strategy...

It will be very very very interesting to see what the mix of V8/V6/awd/rwd comes out to & what the totals look like 30000/52 weeks/ 6 selling days/1551 dealers = .06 car per day per dealer OR 360 days /year * .06 c/d/d == 1 car every 22 days at every Caddy dealer -- seems VERY VERY VERY achievable.

stever · June 2003

"the driving experience alone should make it a desirable choice among midsize luxury SUVs"

First Drive: 2004 Cadillac SRX

Steve, Host

arenn · June 2003

Perhaps it's a bit unfair of me to rail on Edmunds for a column that is a review of a particular car instead of a comparison of cars in a particular class (particular a review that was generally very positive), but it seems to me that this article is emblematic of the "can't buy a break" attitude the auto press gives to American manufacturers. In particular, anywhere the SRX is inferior to some other vehicle in any respect (including vehicles not even in its class, such as the Lincoln Aviator), that's treated as a ding against Cadillac. OTOH, when Caddy is clearly superior to a competitor, that's rarely treated as a ding against the competing vehicle. Indeed, we're rarely ever told if Caddy is superior to any other vehicle.

The first exhibit is how the interior materials of the Caddy are not up to par versus BMW or Lexus. Fair enough. I don't doubt that it's true, given the history of poor quality interiors in GM cars. It's disappointing, but we can face the harsh reality.

But where the Caddy shines, we don't see where it really stacks up against the competition. For example, the Lexus RX 330 is front wheel drive. Imagine for a minute if the SRX were front wheel drive. The rags would be raking Caddy over the coals for not getting it and showing how the X5 kicks its tail. What does Edmunds have to say about the SRX versus the front wheel drive Lexus? "Those accustomed to the soft ride of a Lexus RX 300 or 330 may find it a tad stiff over bumps, but such is the payoff for the Cadillac's handling acuity" I doubt anyone would ever compare a BMW to a Buick by saying those used to the latter's "soft ride" might find the Bimmer "a tad stiff". It's impossible to say from this review if the SRX even out handles the Lexus, Infiniti BMW (or any other car) because Edmunds doesn't tell us. It only tells us that the Cadillac is very good. You can bet that if it fell short versus one of these models, we'd be hearing about it, just as we heard about the lack of hip room versus the Lincoln Aviator (???????)

The general tone of the article is the same throughout. Where Caddy is lacking, versus any vehicle the writer could dredge up, we are told so. When Caddy scores well, it is simply said how the Caddy is good, without reference to superiority versus any other vehicle. (The third row seating is a notable example).

I would have preferred more consistent treatment and a real analysis of how the SRX stacks up against competition in its class.

tidester · June 2003

Try the feeback form.

tidester, host

nvbanker · June 2003

Well, reviews are reviews, but sales are sales. Now some people are totally influenced by what the magazines say, like those who think the sun rises and sets on Consumer Report ratings. Others of us, make up our own mind by trying the car out. If the car sells, it's good. If it doesn't last, the initial review doesn't deal with that anyway. I've seen some great reviews on cars that were junk. GM & Ford can't please the auto mags, no matter what they put out. It's just not possible these days.

libertycat · June 2003

That is very cool you got to see a SRX. I guess I don't understand how the dealer convention thing worked. Did it have lots of wood trim inside? Also, does anyone know if the SRX has a third row seat. I really hope it does as this is an important feature to many including me.

rerenov8r · June 2003

It is power operated ala the Lincolns. I believe one or two reviewers have said the motor/gearing of the seat stow/deploy was a bit poky and not manually overridable -- I wonder if they will make an effort to change this before full production...

dindak · June 2003

The vehicle isn't out yet so you won't likely see a direct comparison test yet. That said, I have seen many reports stating that initial feelings are very good so we will see. The CTS has sold way ahead of projections and continues to do so. I think it boads well for SRX.

jmhillrph1 · June 2003

More (mostly) positive press...

http://wardsauto.com/ar/auto_srx_xlr_cadillacs/index.htm

carnaught · June 2003

Yes, the SRX seemed to have more wood decor in the interior than the CTS, for example. In general, the interior textures were interesting and well done and appeared higher level than the CTS. The only thing that might be holding me back on one is that the car looks too much like a station wagon, rather than an SUV or crossover. In fact, it specifically looks like a CTS station wagon. Nothing "wrong" with that other than the fact that wagons are not "in" now.

adp3 · June 2003

I'm not sure about that. In the SF Bay Area, it's been pretty tough to buy the Passat wagon (though the economic slow down has made it easier, I'm sure). And the A6 wagon appears to be "in." Still seem to be seeing lots of Volvo wagons around. I think it's just a (slight) return to sanity from the SUV crzae. "oh, yeah, we never went off-road, barely used the 4wd capacity, it drove like a truck, and we paid how much more for it than a nice wagon?" OUCH! I wonder if one of these days Subaru will come out with an ad that features all the "cross-overs" and says "they're all trying to be like me - the original cross over - just as comfortable on road as off-road - and for $20,000 less"

:-)

of course, you couldn't get leather in a Subaru five years ago, could you

stever · June 2003

There's leather in my '97 Subaru.

I'm not crazy about it, but it's there. Nice to know my Outback is now a cutting edge crossover vehicle too!

Steve, Host

arenn · June 2003

I just noticed that above I should have written that the third row seating was a notable exception, not an example.

BTW: I agree the SRX looks a lot like a wagon, at least in photos. I've yet to see one up close.

dindak · June 2003

The SRX is very much a crossover, it's much taller than an average wagon. I saw it at the Toronto Auto Show in February. It looks less like a wagon than the Pacifica but yes I do see some wagon in the SRX also.

drivenow · June 2003

Does anyone have a link to ordering guides on this fine vehicle...I'm surprised that my dealer knows very little about this vehicle which is reported to appear in showrooms in late summer!

carnaught · June 2003

and SRX in person, they BOTH look equally like station wagons......more than SUV's. The SRX is fairly low to the ground. IMHO, the Volvo XC90 looks more SUV in comparison.

Cadillac SRX

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles