You are here: Forums SUVs Cadillac SRX 2010 Cadillac SRX

2010 Cadillac SRX

76 messages,  Last post on Mar 02, 2010 at 9:41 PM

You are in the Cadillac SRX Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & tidester

What is this discussion about? Cadillac SRX, SUV

Messages Page 2 of 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Prev Next Last

Go To Msg # Search This Discussion

#11 of 76 Re: 2010 Cadillac SRX [jenp123] by gr8guy Sep 23, 2009 (9:47 am)
Replying to: jenp123 (Sep 11, 2009 11:09 am) When you test drove the 2010 SRX did you notice any vibration? I have driven one here in Canada, ( yup, we get them here too!!!) and the car, an AWD Luxury edition has a vibration that seems to oscillate once you hit 100 kmh or 60 mph and above. AThe dealer has been checking for service bulletins and now they say they have parts coming to correct the problem. Any similar experience? Replies to this message: rbirns1 (Sep 23, 2009 8:58 am) gr8guy (Sep 23, 2009 12:49 pm)
#12 of 76 Re: 2010 Cadillac SRX [gr8guy] by rbirns1 Sep 23, 2009 (9:58 am)
Replying to: gr8guy (Sep 23, 2009 8:47 am) I have driven 4 different SRX's with no vibration issues. Maybe a wheel was out of balance? Was sunroof open? This can cause wind buffeting and vibration, especially at highway speed. Replies to this message: gr8guy (Sep 23, 2009 12:49 pm)
#13 of 76 Re: 2010 Cadillac SRX [rbirns1] by gr8guy Sep 23, 2009 (1:49 pm)
Replying to: rbirns1 (Sep 23, 2009 8:58 am) The first test drive, the dealer found the rear tires were out of balance a bit. They did re-balance them, installed the small plastic air dam on the front below the bumper, but none of these things changed anything. The sun roof was closed tightly as were all other windows. The service manager took a ride with me and he acknowledges there's something going on. Sure hope they find the problem as I'd love to buy the car. The parts were supposed to be in today, so if the dealer can install the "fix" what ever it is, I'll post it here so otgher that may find themselves in a similar situation may find the fix on here rather than go through numerous trials.
#14 of 76 2010 SRX real world mpg by pearl Sep 23, 2009 (4:52 pm)
I will be interested in hearing what owners of the '10 SRX are getting for mpg. So far, most of the car mags have ripped it for being overly heavy (~4300 lbs), resulting in quite a load for the 3L engine to move and yielding poor mileage. The Lexus RX350 is only a little lighter but has a larger 3.5L motor with much more torque and does not seem to labor as much. Anyway, you would think that with the push on all manufacturers to improve mpg, they would all be trying very hard to get the lard out of their cars.
#15 of 76 AWD 3L available yet? by srjacobs Oct 04, 2009 (8:43 am)
I was looking around at the dealer inventory here in Atlanta and noticed that no one had a AWD 3L available. Are these just not being manufactured yet? I would really like to be able to test drive one with the AWD - but doesn't look like that is going to be possible in our area. This true nationwide? Replies to this message: rbirns1 (Oct 05, 2009 5:59 am)
#16 of 76 Re: AWD 3L available yet? [srjacobs] by rbirns1 Oct 05, 2009 (6:59 am)
Replying to: srjacobs (Oct 04, 2009 7:43 am) I got an AWD 3L last week. Here in the NY area, that's pretty much all you can get. Guess they assume most people in the South don't want AWD.
#17 of 76 SRX Test Drive by ericzoom Oct 07, 2009 (3:01 pm)
I test drove a 2010 SRX with Lux. pack. today,and had some observations on this vehicle. The inside was noticeably smaller than my 08' SRX, but the seats were very comfortable, and I especially liked the pull-out thigh support cushion. I found the dash a little busy, but seemed to work well with the rest of the interior. I also found the vertical A/C vents to be too small to cool the drivers side. Granted this was a 90+ degree day here in FL., but didn't seem to have decent air flow coverage. The car seemed to handle pretty well, but was seriously lacking on power, especially on the low end. I had to punch the pedal pretty hard just to get on the highway. The numbers don't lie with that 223 lb ft. torque coming high in the rev band. (5200). In comparison my 08' blows the doors off this engine. I guess where it's really supposed to make up for that short coming is in fuel economy. In the meantime i still have a cheap lease on my 08', and I'll see what happens when that's up in 17 months.   . Replies to this message: rbirns1 (Oct 08, 2009 7:13 am) ericzoom (Oct 08, 2009 7:51 am) sevenfeet0 (Oct 09, 2009 12:57 pm)
#18 of 76 Re: SRX Test Drive [ericzoom] by rbirns1 Oct 08, 2009 (8:13 am)
Replying to: ericzoom (Oct 07, 2009 2:01 pm) The new 2010 SRX cannot be compared to the previous model. They are completely different vehicles with nothing in common besides the name. They really should have renamed the new one. Anyway, the old model was more of an oversized sports sedan (wagon, actually) with possible seating for 7. It was built for performance with sport-sedan power and handling, but poor gas mileage, boxy styling, and high price ultimately led to slow sales. It never fit with the target customers, if they even really knew who they were. Was it aimed at performance drivers? They usually don't want wagon styling or seating for 7. Was it aimed at soccer moms? They would usually trade 0-60 time for comfort and economy. At over $50K, was it aimed to compete with luxury SUV's? Not enough luxury and questionable styling for that market.   The new model is aimed squarely at the luxury SUV market. They did their homework this time. Most luxury SUV buyers want comfort, style (in and out), and quality, along with luxury goodies. Most are happy with "adequate" performance. They get all of this with the new SRX. The dominant sales leader is the Lexus RX, with the highest market share of any vehicle in any segment. Cadillac aimed to build a better Lexus and steal some of those sales. It looks like they got it right (I got one), but only time will tell.   As for the "serious lack of power", that is true when compared to the old V8 SRX, or to other high performance vehicles. If you compare it to the typical SUV, it's not bad. 0-60 in 8.2 seconds, while a little behind other competitors, is not exactly slow. It also happens to be the same pace as the V6 version of the old SRX. Replies to this message: ericzoom (Oct 08, 2009 7:51 am)
#19 of 76 Re: SRX Test Drive [rbirns1] by ericzoom Oct 08, 2009 (8:51 am)
Replying to: rbirns1 (Oct 08, 2009 7:13 am) I was comparing the lack of power of the new one to my 08' V6 SRX, not the 8. There is no way it has the same pace as the old one. It all comes down to "too much weight,too little torque high in the rev band. I would more likely change it to "barely adequate performance". It had practically no punch at all, which IMO can become dangerous in some situations. Obviously GM knew about this shortcoming to have a Turbo option offered sometime in the future.
#20 of 76 Re: SRX Test Drive [ericzoom] by sevenfeet0 Oct 09, 2009 (1:57 pm)
Replying to: ericzoom (Oct 07, 2009 2:01 pm) The launch of this vehicle in terms of the engine reminds me of some of the issues of the 2004 SRX launch, but not in the same ways. Back then, Cadillac though that there would be a bigger mix of V8 Northstar buyers so they launched the car with many more of them in the showrooms. The public facefaulted at the $50K+ base price and went for the more reasonable $40K+ V6 versions. And the V6 versions had adequate power for most buyers.   Fast forward to today. The 2010 SRX gets off the ground with the smaller engine only and the more powerful (but smaller still) turbo engine won't be available for another month or so. I agree, 223 torques is not going to cut it for us men who were used to the midrange of the old SRX. But to the women the car is trying to appeal to that are probably crossshopping the RS350, it's probably going to be adequate again. And there's always the turbo engine if you really want more power.   I'm curious if there are better methods that GM can use to reduce the weight of vehicles like this without driving the costs through the roof. Weight reduction has become a big concern not only with performance vehicles but everyday cars that are equipped with more and more safety features that increase the mass of a vehicle. There has to be a program like this at GM studying the issue. Hybrids and electric vehicles will be even heavier without weight reduction programs.

Messages Page 2 of 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Prev Next Last

Go To Msg # Search This Discussion

You are here: Forums SUVs Cadillac SRX 2010 Cadillac SRX