When you put black cladding all around the bottom five inches of the car, it shows you have no confidence in the shape you've designed. Like the Ford Edge, this car would look so much better if the blacked out bottom section wasn't there at all.
Die tall fat cars, die!
The 2.8T uses port fuel injection, not DI.
In terms of 0-60 figures, both engines seem to be underachievers. The 260-hp X5 does it in 7.8 seconds, while the 300-hp turbo X6 does it in 6.5 seconds. Both weigh even more than the SRX.
It's nice to see Caddy coming back. A few years ago it looked like they were flat on their back - and a better candidate for euthanasia than Oldsmobile.
I hope the other divisions are taking notes and doing something about it.
That said, you couldn't give me one of these things. Not even if the ashtrays were full of pure coke, and the trunk live strippers.
@Van Sarockin, rogue trebuchet: I was considering one, but knowing that the option list includes the coke and stripper package (Option Code RPO C69, The Executive Entertainment Package), count me in! Maybe I can get it upgraded to a dealer-installed Twins package!
This SRX, like the previous one, different as it was, remains the only crossover I actually like. It looks fantastic and I'm glad it has the engine it deserves.
A V version could be fun, but as there's no X3 M (yet) or RX F (never), they'd be blazing a trail.
My one niggle: isn't 300 horsepower a bit low for a V6 that's DI and turbo? You'd think a naturally-aspirated engine could do 300. And if it had the same horsepower-per-liter as the Cobalt SS Supercharged, for instance, it would have 364. Just sayin'.
@bmoreDLJ: Why? It's a 2.8 liter, and probably a fairly conservative one at that.
It's hard to find direct comparisons these days, as most V6's have gotten so damn big (3.5L or more).
Consider the i6 in the current BMW 328. It's normally-aspirated and puts out 230hp/200lb-ft or so.
The 3.0 boxer in the current Subaru Legacy does a little more, but only by a few percent. The 3.0 V6 that used to be in the Audi A4 a few years back was pretty similar.
And you know that GM's blowing the crap out of the Cobalt to get that sort of output. I really doubt that Caddy would be comfortable with that sort of thing.
Seems well executed enough, but I can't help but notice that all Cadillacs look the same these days and none of them look good! I mean, seriously, what happened to the good ol' days?
DoctorNine's D9 Cat promoted this comment
Psiu! Puxa!: You're right, Mopar or no car! was starred
Psiu! Puxa!: You're right, Mopar or no car! was unstarred
@Psiu! Puxa!: Harley Earl is dead. GM never hired an adequate replacement. And now, instead of designers building cars, they have a finance guy, chairing a committee, that is micromanaged by the government. Any other questions?
What is it with the American "luxury" brands making all of their products look like Jack Nicholson? I mean, this sounds like a great car-ish thingy, but the exterior is ugly as sin.
@KitRabbit: Not Aero, Turbo X, and it does share elements, though they've been tweaked for the SRX. It performs very similarly, but it's a bit more neutral than the Turbo X, which can be fairly easily provoked into oversteer.
After 23 years of reading car reviews, I can safely say that "whopping" is the most hackneyed word in automotive journalism.
It's so hackneyed I once heard the Stig use it.
@Wes Siler: What can I say, I like it. Not the most Jalop option, but there are people that needs something like this. We had wagons before and I can understand why someone would choose a CUV over a wagon. And I have a Range Rover that has seen the Pantanal, I do understand what they can do.
@Syrax - in black for the Jezebanned: The Pantanal... Isn't that a place in Brazil that looks and smells like the crotch of a set of trousers worn by a very fat man with diarrhea?
08/07/09
Die tall fat cars, die!
08/07/09
08/07/09
@Dallifornia: Yeah, we know that it's meant to look sportier, but big fat things don't look sporty just by accessorizing.
08/07/09
In terms of 0-60 figures, both engines seem to be underachievers. The 260-hp X5 does it in 7.8 seconds, while the 300-hp turbo X6 does it in 6.5 seconds. Both weigh even more than the SRX.
08/07/09
/waiting for the CTW
08/07/09
I hope the other divisions are taking notes and doing something about it.
That said, you couldn't give me one of these things. Not even if the ashtrays were full of pure coke, and the trunk live strippers.
08/07/09
08/07/09
08/07/09
08/07/09
I do. Because that's how they work.
08/07/09
08/07/09
A V version could be fun, but as there's no X3 M (yet) or RX F (never), they'd be blazing a trail.
My one niggle: isn't 300 horsepower a bit low for a V6 that's DI and turbo? You'd think a naturally-aspirated engine could do 300. And if it had the same horsepower-per-liter as the Cobalt SS Supercharged, for instance, it would have 364. Just sayin'.
08/07/09
It's hard to find direct comparisons these days, as most V6's have gotten so damn big (3.5L or more).
Consider the i6 in the current BMW 328. It's normally-aspirated and puts out 230hp/200lb-ft or so.
The 3.0 boxer in the current Subaru Legacy does a little more, but only by a few percent. The 3.0 V6 that used to be in the Audi A4 a few years back was pretty similar.
And you know that GM's blowing the crap out of the Cobalt to get that sort of output. I really doubt that Caddy would be comfortable with that sort of thing.
08/07/09
08/07/09
08/07/09
08/07/09
08/07/09
Seems well executed enough, but I can't help but notice that all Cadillacs look the same these days and none of them look good! I mean, seriously, what happened to the good ol' days?
08/07/09
08/07/09
@DoctorNine's D9 Cat: ..summbeechin new edit thingies lost my jpg..
08/07/09
08/07/09
08/07/09
08/07/09
It's so hackneyed I once heard the Stig use it.
08/07/09
08/07/09
Hey Ben, is the torque curve as flat-tastic as the SHO's?
08/07/09
08/07/09
08/07/09
08/07/09
08/07/09
@DoctorNine's D9 Cat: Traversing the Pantanal...
08/07/09
@DoctorNine's D9 Cat: ..and surviving...
08/07/09
@DoctorNine's D9 Cat: You forgot the alligators
08/07/09
Tends to decrease the mileage one can expect to get on a set of tires, no?
08/07/09