2004 Cadillac SRX: CTS spawns a wagon/crossover.

[Mr.IncrediblyBored]

<a target=new class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://www.autoweek.com/cat_content.mv?port_code=autoweek&cat_code=reviews&loc_code=index&content_code=06742918">2004 Cadillac SRX
CTS spawns a wagon: Whatever it is, Caddy's SRX is a great driver</a>

With 18-inch wheels, a throaty Northstar V8, an optional targa-like sunroof offering 6.5 square feet of sky, and magneto-rheological ride control, we think the SRX is a significant improvement over the CTS sedan on which it?s based.

I love that sunroof.

Pics

 

[Liviathan]

Nice...sunroof does look nice.

 

[Ryan]

Hmmm, not bad

 

[KingNothing]

Looks a little like a Volvo wagon from the rear.

 

[DerProfi]

I don't know about this... The CTS is putting up some pretty unimpressive sales numbers, isn't it? And I don't regularly read car magazines, but I seem to remember that back during 2002 the CTS was consistently getting ranked inferior to other cars in the same class. But as you point out, the SRX apparently addresses some of the big complaints in the CTS.

I guess only time will tell how this fares against the X5 and the Acura SUVs. I wonder what the price will be?

Large sunroofs are cool, of course. But if you want a huge hole to the sky, there's nothing that beats a VW Bus!

 

[Mr.IncrediblyBored]

Originally posted by: DerProfi
I don't know about this... The CTS is putting up some pretty unimpressive sales numbers, isn't it? And I don't regularly read car magazines, but I seem to remember that back during 2002 the CTS was consistently getting ranked inferior to other cars in the same class. But as you point out, the SRX apparently addresses some of the big complaints in the CTS.

I guess only time will tell how this fares against the X5 and the Acura SUVs. I wonder what the price will be?

Large sunroofs are cool, of course. But if you want a huge hole to the sky, there's nothing that beats a VW Bus!

What do you consider unimpressive? They sold ~38,000 units through December 2003. The car went on sale around April, if I recall correctly. Not sure what GM's projected numbers were, but a sell rate of 4600 units per month is respectable for a $30,000+ luxury sedan.

http://www.autosite.com/editoria/asmr/svsedan.asp

 

[CraigRT]

Oh god.. it's a nice car, but it should be badged different... Cadillac is going gay on us!! this is NOT what Cadillac is all about!!!

 

[nord1899]

Bleh. I still hate the front grill on the caddy's.

 

[vi edit]

Just read about this in the latest C&D. Looks damn sweet. With the V8 it should be doing 0-60 in under 7 seconds by C&D speculations. Looks good, drives good, hauls ass, and "only" runs 45k.

Between this and the Chevy Equinox, GM is coming out with some very sweet vehicles.

Bout time

 

[Mr.IncrediblyBored]

Originally posted by: Yield
Oh god.. it's a nice car, but it should be badged different... Cadillac is going gay on us!! this is NOT what Cadillac is all about!!!

And what is Caddy all about, exactly? Those huge, hideous tail fins? The same tail fins everybody bashed back in the day?

Some people may not like Cadillac's new "Science and Technology" theme, but IMO its the only way to regain the respect of the world market.

 

[CraigRT]

Originally posted by: KnightBreed

Originally posted by: Yield
Oh god.. it's a nice car, but it should be badged different... Cadillac is going gay on us!! this is NOT what Cadillac is all about!!!

And what is Caddy all about, exactly? Those huge, hideous tail fins? The same tail fins everybody bashed back in the day?

Some people may not like Cadillac's new "Science and Technology" theme, but IMO its the only way to regain the respect of the world market.

I agree with the respect thing... but I'm just going on a historic aspect... well, whatever.. it is a nice car though.

 

[Spac3d]

Fugly.

 

[DerProfi]

Originally posted by: KnightBreed

What do you consider unimpressive? They sold ~38,000 units through December 2003. The car went on sale around April, if I recall correctly. Not sure what GM's projected numbers were, but a sell rate of 4600 units per month is respectable for a $30,000+ luxury sedan.

http://www.autosite.com/editoria/asmr/svsedan.asp

I'm probably just repeating rumors I've heard 3rd hand, and I'm definitely not up on the auto news. I used to read the Edmunds boards religiously last summer/fall, but haven' been there since. I do notice that Edmunds currently says the CTS is going for only about $500 over dealer invoice + very low financing, so if I were in the market for one I'd have to wonder why a car that's in high demand would be so heavily discounted. I'm a paranoid consumer, though

 

[Mr.IncrediblyBored]

Originally posted by: DerProfi

Originally posted by: KnightBreed

What do you consider unimpressive? They sold ~38,000 units through December 2003. The car went on sale around April, if I recall correctly. Not sure what GM's projected numbers were, but a sell rate of 4600 units per month is respectable for a $30,000+ luxury sedan.

http://www.autosite.com/editoria/asmr/svsedan.asp

I'm probably just repeating rumors I've heard 3rd hand, and I'm definitely not up on the auto news. I used to read the Edmunds boards religiously last summer/fall, but haven' been there since. I do notice that Edmunds currently says the CTS is going for only about $500 over dealer invoice + very low financing, so if I were in the market for one I'd have to wonder why a car that's in high demand would be so heavily discounted. I'm a paranoid consumer, though

I wouldn't judge the car soley because it has incentives available. Besides, GM has heavy incentives on all their divisions. I don't know how it would be selling without the rebates or great lease deals.

 

[ElFenix]

4.6-liter V8?s 315 horsepower and 310 lb-ft of torque

they need to put that engine in the CTS. 220/220 is nice but not a lot for a 3500 lb "sport sedan"

those storage bins under the floor of the cargo area are a good idea. keep your emergency stuff in them.

 

[RU482]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

4.6-liter V8?s 315 horsepower and 310 lb-ft of torque

they need to put that engine in the CTS. 220/220 is nice but not a lot for a 3500 lb "sport sedan"

those storage bins under the floor of the cargo area are a good idea. keep your emergency stuff in them.

CTS is getting a ~400HP engine and 6 speed tranny option soon...I'll see if I can find some more info

 

[Anubis]

I say a god damn thats ugly

 

[WinkOsmosis]

Pisses me off that they raise it 2" and the EPA classifies it as a truck.

 

[Mr.IncrediblyBored]

Originally posted by: redly1

Originally posted by: ElFenix

4.6-liter V8?s 315 horsepower and 310 lb-ft of torque

they need to put that engine in the CTS. 220/220 is nice but not a lot for a 3500 lb "sport sedan"

those storage bins under the floor of the cargo area are a good idea. keep your emergency stuff in them.

CTS is getting a ~400HP engine and 6 speed tranny option soon...I'll see if I can find some more info

Shooting high: Cadillac?s gambit calls for luxury and performance

 

[NFS4]

FX45 or SRX??

That's an easy one for me...FX45 by a LANDSLIDE!!!! The SRX is as fugly as the CTS and its interior is drab and boring.

 

[WinkOsmosis]

Originally posted by: NFS4
FX45 or SRX??

That's an easy one for me...FX45 by a LANDSLIDE!!!! The SRX is as fugly as the CTS and its interior is drab and boring.

I saw an FX45 today... so beautiful. I wonder if it's possible to lower it 6"...

 

[Howard]

yuo ar3 t3h uglie, my good man.

 

[Mr.IncrediblyBored]

Originally posted by: NFS4
FX45 or SRX??

That's an easy one for me...FX45 by a LANDSLIDE!!!! The SRX is as fugly as the CTS and its interior is drab and boring.

I thought about that comparison earlier, but the SRX is noticeably larger... and doesn't look like an art project reject the FX. The FX has the worst stance out of any SUV/crossover I've ever seen. The overall proportions make it look cartoonish, and the huge wheels only exacerbate the odd look.

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: NFS4 its interior is drab and boring.

it IS a luxury car, after all. and its not particularly either of those anyway.

 

[NFS4]

Originally posted by: KnightBreed

Originally posted by: NFS4
FX45 or SRX??

That's an easy one for me...FX45 by a LANDSLIDE!!!! The SRX is as fugly as the CTS and its interior is drab and boring.

I thought about that comparison earlier, but the SRX is noticeably larger... and doesn't look like an art project reject the FX. The FX has the worst stance out of any SUV/crossover I've ever seen. The overall proportions make it look cartoonish, and the huge wheels only exacerbate the odd look.

Worst stance? It has the stance of a sports car with the wheels pushed out to the corners. Not to mention that it would kill the SRX in handling/breaking/acceleration. They both have about the same cargo capacity and the the FX45 definitely has the classier interior with real aluminum trim.

The FX45 has a distinct look that no other vehicle can claim while still having AWD and great passenger/cargo volume.

Cargo volume (rear seat up/rear seat down):

FX45: 27.4/64.5
SRX: 32.4/59.5


The SRX is nothing but a crappy-looking CTS on stilts. We could always do a poll and see which would get the nod. I'll put $100 on the FX45