By Michael Posner
May 11, 2007 -
Car-based crossovers (CUV's) are America’s SUV escape pod of choice. Domesticated SUV’s from Nissan, Toyota, Honda, Ford and more have found favor, as have their upmarket homonyms. Although GM was late to the crossover party, the GMC Acadia and Saturn Outlook are (at least for the moment) highly competitive products. At the top end, Cadillac stands pat with its three-year-old SRX. For '07, Caddy’s attempted to re-invigorate their CUV with a new interior.
Yes, well, first impressions last. Here’s the long and tall of it: the SRX looks more like a station wagon than an SUV, albeit a very BIG station wagon. From the front, the SRX wears a surprisingly demure version of Caddy’s spizzarkle prow. From any other angle, the vehicle’s “Art and Science” creases work at cross-purposes to a distinctly disjointed multi-level assortment of window shapes. There are some strange details: fly-eyed headlights, boomerang taillight and the like. Overall, the genre-straddling SRX has a lot of generic GM about it. At best, it’s more distinctive than attractive.
And so to the interior.
The SRX’ center console benefits from a much needed makeover. The old console’s central feature— a large, featureless letter box (CD and DVD slot)— has disappeared. The display screen assumes its rightful place mid-dash, with an undersized analog clock above and two oversized rotary controls climate control buttons below. A chrome strip surrounds the pod and the new, intersecting gauges. A wood strip (complete with hidden dash cubby) bisects the cabin.
In general, the ’07 SRX’ fit, finish and softer, [partially] hand crafted materials are a cut above the previous model’s. In specific, details bedevil. The thin plastic door pockets still flex when you insert road supplies. The trim surrounding the vent rings reflects straight into the oversized side mirrors. The seat belt attaches to the seat instead of the B-pillar, eliminating adjustment and inviting decapitation for shorter drivers.
The SRX’ touch screen navigation system is a disaster. The screen graphics are crude. The voice prompts are unclear and imprecise, suggesting turns on roads that merely curved (once putting us on the Blue Ridge Parkway with no exit to our destination). In contrast, the [optional] Bose 5.1 Cabin Surround DVD-based digital audio system is a glorious device. Played through the SRX’ 10 speakers, Pink Floyd never sounded so hallucinogenic.
The SRX’ intrusive transmission tunnel renders the second row quad (not quint) compatible. Despite the Caddy’s considerable length, the SRX’ third row is best suited to pre-pubescent children who like to hide in cupboards. On the positive side, the process of getting into the way back is so tortuous they’ll probably fall asleep from exhaustion once they arrive. After detaching the headrests, the motorized third row chairs tumble and stow in a sloth-like 35 seconds. If you’re still awake, you’ve got enough space for several large boxes of lifestyle brochures.
Our $38k SRX holstered Caddy’s 260hp 3.6-liter V6 with a five-speed autobox (the ‘07 V8 gets six cogs). The double overhead cammed, multi-valved powerplant is smooth and responsive in waft mode, and throaty and powerful when stomped upon. Although the SRX motors to 60 mph from rest in a respectable 7.2 seconds, highway passing occurs at roughly the same pace as the folding rear seats. Plan ahead, leave early.
On long sweepers, Caddy’s crossover is a confident companion, absorbing undulations and responding to minor steering inputs with grace and something not unlike élan. But as soon as you up the pace and/or tighten the bends, the SRX’ light steering, soft rear suspension, high center of gravity and long wheelbase exact a poise penalty. The modestly shod, grip challenged SRX takes to small mountain roads like a country music fan to Judas Priest’s Painkiller. Although, it's a serene cruiser, the Caddy's dynamics aren't a patch on Infiniti FX-series.
Off road, c’mon, get real. The SRX is about as rugged as your average string quartet. Towing? You can schlep anything you like as long as it’s under 2000 pounds. The SRX six’ fuel economy clocks in at 15/22mpg. That may be about par for the course for its competitors, but it’s still a pretty frightening stat for a company desperately seeking sales in a world of escalating gas prices.
It’s hard to say why the SRX has failed to capture the imagination of American SUV refugees. Cabin quality (or lack thereof) was certainly a problem— which the automaker’s now rectified. The lack of a sustained and coherent marketing campaign also kept Caddy's CUV off the import buyer’s radar. And the vehicle’s bland looks did it no favors.
Ultimately, it’s the latter that torpedoed the SRX. Caddies need charisma. The SRX rides, handles and cossets beautifully; it walks the walk, but it doesn’t talk the talk. In fact, the SRX proves that automotive beauty must be skin deep.
Subscribe to Newsletter
More Reviews35 Responses to “ Cadillac SRX Review ”
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 » Show All Reverse Order
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 » Show All Reverse Order
Leave a Reply 
Back to Top
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Digg
del.icio.us
Blinklist
Furl
Netscape
Google
NewsVine
Reddit
StumbleUpon
Technorati
YahooMyWeb
Windows Live
POWERED
May 11th, 2007 at 7:35 am
hmmm… funny, i always thought that the SRX was the better looking of the CUVs. The infiniti FX is the only other one that looks better, IMHO.
May 11th, 2007 at 7:58 am
The optional adaptive shocks improve the handling considerably.
It is shocking how poorly the SRX has sold. The interior deserves some of the blame, but the wagonish proportions probably deserve most of it.
The market has spoken, and it prefers stubbier, chunkier proportions in its SUVSs. F
or pricing information on the SRX: http://www.truedelta.com/models/SRX.php
May 11th, 2007 at 8:12 am
Good review. The SRX has the same problem as the Freestyle and R-class — they look too much like a station wagon for families trying to avoid the mommyvan label. Pity.
May 11th, 2007 at 8:13 am
Lost on the Blue Ridge Parkway…life could be worse. That’s where I spend many a weekend this time of year. :)
May 11th, 2007 at 8:54 am
Grave concerns about Cadillac quality and resale value prompted us to purchase an Infiniti FX35. So far we are very pleased with it.
May 11th, 2007 at 9:26 am
This could make for a nice contrarian used car buy
May 11th, 2007 at 9:55 am
More details please… Is Caddy’s Northstar the optional V8? To which division does the V6 owe its existence? I understand that these answers are often muddled in GM’s corporate soup.
Here’s what I’m getting at: how is this CUV a real Cadillac? GM’s got this platform covered with the Acadia, Outlook, probably the Ranier and Equinox as well -and heaven forbid, the H3? It appears that as long at Caddy offers the Escalade (the last Caddy with a real name), they have to offer something in between.
The existence of this badge-engineered orphan is proof positive that GM doesn’t know how to orient its divisions to prevent competition under its own umbrella. Why can’t GMC handle all the upmarket trucks? If Caddy’s gonna save its skin, they gotta return to making proper luxury sedans, maybe allowing for one coupe/roadster.
May 11th, 2007 at 10:03 am
durailer-
\It's neither badge engineered (SIGMA architecture in GM speak) and the V6 appears in few other products (pre-07)…
this vehicle has been mismarketed since intro-ed. Caddy made a last minute change to make this a nominal 7 seater…it was supposed to look more like the Vizion (sp?) concept of the early '00.
May 11th, 2007 at 10:17 am
I actually quite like this vehicle. Not as nice-looking as the FX35, but comes without the anemic lawn mower exhaust sound of said vehicle…
It got rave reviews in comparos in many car mags. So is it really that bad?
May 11th, 2007 at 10:24 am
Car and Driver placed the SRX V-8 2nd only to the new Acura MDX in a recent test of $50K SUV’s. Obviously, the extra grunt and cogs of the V-8/6 speed and the adaptive shocks help.
Unfortunately, the vast majority of SRX’s are equipped like the tester, and so suffer dynamically, though the 0-60 times are very competitive. I’m guessing that the tester was RWD.
The major problem with the SRX is that it is drived from the old CTS platform (which may have been an Opel platform, I could be wrong), and as such is narrow in comparison to its rivals. This seriously compromises cabin space and gives the SRX an ungainly, top-heavy appearance.
The SRX’s new interior is indeed a major improvement on the old model. Unfortunately, GM has once again squandered an opportunity by allowing the old version to pollute buyer’s minds. Now, with a crop of newly-designed or redesigned competitors, the SRX is badly behind the curve.
I think what has hurt the SRX most is neglect from GM marketing. Once again, we see that GM’s proliferation of nameplates and lines means that everyone gets less than they need; and some, like the SRX, get nothing at all.
Frankly, many, if not most, SRX shoppers will be drawn to the Acadia, and if they need three rows, the GMC wins hands down. GM’s mind-numbing badge-engineering means that the SRX is cometing against other GM brands’ SUV/CUV’s, and all they end up doing is cannibalizing sales from each other, and the SRX cannot get the resources it needs to be a serious competitor to the RX350/Acura MDX/BMW X5, etc.