SRX Gets 3.6 Fix

Edward Niedermeyer
by Edward Niedermeyer

Back in January, when news broke that GM would be pulling its 2.8T V6 from the Cadillac lineup, I reckoned that

Cadillac needs to figure out if it wants to keep its SRX saddled to an underwhelming engine, or if it wants to add its widely-lauded 3.6 direct injection V6 to the SRX lineup.

And you know what? Cadillac made the right call (or at least the obvious one). But will GM seal the deal and drop the unloved 3.0?

Marketing VP Don Butler says the the addition of the 3.6

will make the SRX more responsive for passing on the highway, entering freeways from on-ramps and climbing hills

while revealing that

EPA fuel economy ratings have not been finalized, but Cadillac expects the SRX to provide customers with comparable real-world fuel efficiency. The current engine has an EPA rating of 18 city/25 highway mpg.

Though Cadillac’s press release wording is less than explicit, there’s some precedent here. In the 2010 model year, the Buick LaCrosse was available with both the 3.0 and 3.6, and the 3.0 was rated one MPG worse on the highway (17/26 compared to 17/27). For 2011, the 3.0 has been dropped from the LaCrosse and for 2012, a mild hybrid is being added to the lineup… look for a similar progression under the SRX’s hood.

Join the conversation
5 of 35 comments
  • Paul W Paul W on Apr 13, 2011

    I wonder if that goes for the Saab 9-4X as well...

  • Bumpy ii Bumpy ii on Apr 13, 2011

    Onw wonders if the 3.0L also suffers from the timing chain woes of the 3.6L. One also wonders why a Cadillac has a "base" engine in the first place.

    • Chris Haak Chris Haak on Apr 13, 2011

      Do you mean the same way you can get a BMW 3 Series with four engines in the US (3.0 NA, 3.0T, 3.0D, 4.0 V8)? Or the M-B C-Class with its 3.0 and 3.5 liter V6 choices? Audi puts 2.0Ts in most A4s. Having multiple engine choices is common in this space. What's odd is that the GM 3.0 and 3.6 are seemingly nearly the same engine, but with thicker sleeves in the cylinder of the 3.0 to reduce displacement, at apparently no benefit to fuel economy vis a vis the 3.6.

  • Dan R Dan R on Apr 13, 2011

    That is a very dry looking engine. Is that rust on the timing chain?

  • Ponchoman49 Ponchoman49 on Apr 13, 2011

    No it's the timing chain getting ready to fly off.