All,
Finally had the opportunity to check out both the new 2010 SRX and the CTS Sport Wagon.
The SRX is too small and looks too much like a Saturn Vue...although we just learned that Saturn has bit the big one! Love the styling of the CTS wagon, but alas, too small as well. With the slope of the rear it looks a lot like the Dodge Magnum albiet a much nicer ride. Looks as if I may trade for an STS when my warranty expires.
Sad....
Regards,
BD

B Daddy, Check out the 2010 Equinox. Every bit the room of a SRX, and it looks very sporty as well.
I'm in the same boat as you. Don't really care for either of them. I'm not gunna spend 40-50K on a vehicle
i'm not crazy about.
The Equinox is on my very short list, and time is growing near............... I will miss the N* & this forum though.

I have to think that a CTS wagon is larger/more room than a STS sedan (not to mention a MUCH better designed and built car)

LF54,
Not true,
The STS has more seating and leg room...not to mention a large trunk (but I didn't bring a tape measure). The low slope of the CTS hatch is a compromise. The current SRX doesn't have tons of room...but...works for my utility needs. I even transported a Jet Ski up north in it! Will miss the N* AWD, but have until 3-2011 until the warranty expires so I still have some time. I do like the 3.6DI motor even if it has 2 less lungs. Test drove a N* STS. It cooked!
Regards,
BD

Ditto on the too small sloping back end.

Ditto on the 2010 Equinox AWD LTZ

Ordered mine last week. Traded the 05. Gave me a good ACV on the '05 because they needed good used cars. Mine was CPO with 2 years and 34k left on the warranty.

I really wanted to like the new SRX, but, that sloping back killed it for me. If I put my dog back there--hell, I couldn't put him back there. To add insult to injury, there still isn't ample legroom in the back seat. In my '08, the storage in the rear made up for the legroom. Now what?

IMO, the last gen SRX and the new SRX are aimed at different demographics. This new SRX should fit in snuggly next to the Lexus RX. I know a few owners of RX's and the SUV never sees any load besides groceries. I kinda thought the last gen SRX was aimed at noone besides CAdillac afficianados and people who wanted an awd CTS.

IMO, the last gen SRX and the new SRX are aimed at different demographics. This new SRX should fit in snuggly next to the Lexus RX. I know a few owners of RX's and the SUV never sees any load besides groceries. I kinda thought the last gen SRX was aimed at noone besides CAdillac afficianados and people who wanted an awd CTS.

I don't buy it.

I think that GM thought that the SRX was aimed at people who wanted a smaller Escalade that provided performance in league with the European marques. On paper, the SRX was a winner and the auto journalists loved it - typically pegging it (usually in N* form) ahead of its rivals. GM must have believed the press clippings: they punctuated their initial marketing strategy by flooding the dealerships with loaded-up (and pricey) V8 models.

Sadly, GM's target market proved to be only a niche. The unique features (optional V8, MRC, ultraview, etc.) just didn't resonate with that many people and proved that Lexus customers couldn't be wooed away by better performance alone. And customers' perception of the Cadillac brand was only really starting to improve in those days.

As the years went by, GM tried to re-aim the 1st gen SRX at broader demographics, providing dealerships with more V6 models, offering a sporty optional front clip, and "luxing-up" the interior. The vehicle became more attractive to wealthy soccer moms (a healthy-sized demographic) but its initial niche reputation couldn't be shaken - especially given that GM's advertising support had all but dried up. Also, that demographic is very sensitive to reliability reputations - and the SRX had not earned a strong one.

We leased our '04 because we liked the SRX's styling, performance, and utility. It was our first Cadillac and we liked it because buying a Cadillac was going against the grain - everybody was pushing me toward Lexus, Acura, BMW, or Audi (they still do that, by the way). Still, five years ago, I could hardly have been described as a Cadillac aficionado at the time - back then, I didn't even like the 1st gen CTS that much and didn't really care for the Escalade either.

These comments and perceptions about the 1st gen SRX really get me riled up.
I consistently hear that the SRX is a tall wagon. is it a tall wagon and not a CUV because the roof doesn't slope?
Makes no sense if that is the sole criteria for a CUV.
Secondly the SRX is built on the STS's floorpan, not the CTS's.
It has a 116" wheelbase and not the 113.9" wheelbase of the CTS.
It shares interior parts, grille and headlights with the CTS and not much else.
Why is it not a CUV?
The only really negative for me with the SRX is the narrowness of it. 3 abreast in the rear is tight.

B Daddy, Check out the 2010 Equinox. Every bit the room of a SRX, and it looks very sporty as well.
I'm in the same boat as you. Don't really care for either of them. I'm not gunna spend 40-50K on a vehicle
i'm not crazy about.
The Equinox is on my very short list, and time is growing near............... I will miss the N* & this forum though.

Jim--have you seen the Equinox in person? I had the same thoughts as you, until yesterday when I actually saw the Equinox. After a single walk-around, I was sure that there was no way I'd buy it. I headed back over to the Caddy lot where I belong. :lol:

These comments and perceptions about the 1st gen SRX really get me riled up.
I consistently hear that the SRX is a tall wagon. is it a tall wagon and not a CUV because the roof doesn't slope?


What difference does it make, really? Most people (including me) judge a vehicle model by its appearance, and IMO the 1st gen SRX looks like a wagon. I happen to like wagons, so no problem there. :D

Jim--have you seen the Equinox in person? I had the same thoughts as you, until yesterday when I actually saw the Equinox. After a single walk-around, I was sure that there was no way I'd buy it. I headed back over to the Caddy lot where I belong. :lol:

Yes, I have seen & drove. Did you see a LTZ or base. The LTZ is very sharp.

If you want to stick with a crossover, check out the Buick Enclave, Ford Flex, and Lincoln MKT.

If you want a sedan, check out the DTS, Lucerne CXS / Super, Lincoln MKS, and CPO Lexus LS430. The STS is a great car, but I don't think the trunk is much bigger than a CTS.

We were driving past Superior Cadillac today and they had a CTS wagon out front. I had never seen one in person, so we stopped and I walked around it. It was a beautiful car, but too small for us. It was a 3.6 premium AWD and had a sticker price of a shocking $56K!

had a sticker price of a shocking $56K!

The Equinox is look better, and better.........

56K
50400 GMS
53424 with tax (Michigan)
no incentives
53424 @ 5.25% for 60 months = $1014.26 a month
no thanks

GM Jim,
Looked at the Equinox LTZ on line today. I owned a 2002 Trailblazer LTZ and currently own a 2007 Tahoe LTZ. The Tahoe is a close as you can get to an Escalade without the larger V8 and chrome!
Although it's not a Cadillac, I must say I was impressed with the list of options and specs. Loaded with everything about $20K less than the new SRX or CTS SW.
Since I currently own 5 cars...I must ask the question why not look at the Equinox. The answer....I will!
Regards,
BD

I just think the Equinox is ugly...low and long...look's like the HHR's big brother. The new SRX is extremely hot, but, I can't make purchasing decisions on looks alone. Here's hoping the 2010 SRX gives up more storage space. In the meantime, I'll go in for a test drive. A lot of Atlanta drivers have the new SRX already.

Gordymac--do you mean the Traverse? The 2010 Equinox is shorter than the '10 SRX. Here are the dimensions:

Height:
SRX = 66.8"
Equinox = 66.3"

Length:
SRX = 190.7"
Equinox = 187.8"

gordymac,
I'm sorry the "hot" new SRX looks like the Saturn Vue dressed up.....
regards,
BD

56K
50400 GMS
53424 with tax (Michigan)
no incentives
53424 @ 5.25% for 60 months = $1014.26 a month
no thanks

So, go price out an E Class or 5 series wagon... that Caddy is priced very well compared to the competition

Would the CTS not be more like a 3 series, STS is more 5 series IMO.

gordymac,
I'm sorry the "hot" new SRX looks like the Saturn Vue dressed up.....
regards,
BD

I don't get why people have this view, we know what it is but who cares what it rides on.

The Escalade is just a nice Chevy truck right but no one ever says that, the Enclave is not a dressed up Traverse they are just built on the same platform.

If the SRX is nice and you like it then get it.