http://motortrend.com/roadtests/suv/112_0406_storm/

IMHO the Cad should be FIRST. I found the only 2 negatives about the SRX was the lack of "off roading ability" and lack of HD towing package.

IMHO the performance BS doesn't matter if you're not driving the car on the track or have the ability to drive at 10/10ths (fery few of us do that), so outside of bragging rights the SRX is #1 with 3rd row seating; ultravision and a 2nd seat that is actually comfortable. If you need to brag, it did beat everyone in 0-60! :)

I own 2 Porsches a 1991 and a 2002 911 and THOSE are REAL Porsches. :)

I completely agree doncapecod. I wanted 3rd row seating availability -- so wouldn't even consider the others. I don't drive on the racetrack and for our every day running around or family trips...this car is HEAVEN!

The test is a few months old, it was in the June issue of Motor Trend which came out in early May.

I don't agree that the SRX should have won given the parameters of the test. You can question the wisdom and real world applicability of a comparison test of sport utes that is primarily test track driven - which I think is what you guys are really doing when you say you don't agree with the finish order. However, Motor Trend was clear as to their intent:

“This isn't a beauty contest nor a tally of nifty electronic features. This is a flat-out performance test.”

Does anyone actually buy a sport utility on this kind of basis? I would say very, very few. However, none of the comparison tests in any of the magazines are intended to indicate that the top pick is the right pick for everyone. You take the info in the story and make the best pick for your needs. This test (for me) is just as valid as C&D picking the SRX as the Best Midsize Luxury SUV & Automobile picking the SRX as an All Star.

You can’t win ‘em all.

Touche, rcawood... :yawn: :worship:

Now when I jump all over you guys for saying the SRX "drives like a sports car", I can point to this article for support. :D

For us the third seat was a major factor in the SRX purchase, even though it may only be used once a year. They weighed their decision on lap times and that does not really apply to the real world, however the comments regarding wet handling are a little disconcerting. We will probably find out how valid those comments are in a couple of months..

The following is from www.canadiandriver.com re 1st test drive of the SRX March 10, 2003.
"Despite not having yet finished fine-tuning their work, they let us flog their new baby back-to-back against a BMW X5, Mercedes ML500, Lexus LX300 and a Volvo XC90. No provisos, no excuses - just go through a variety of exercises on frozen lakes, high-speed snow-covered tracks and various other venues. The instructions were simple - throw everything you’ve got at them, compare them back to back with the best out there, and tell us what we’ve got left to do. My recommendation? Finish picking out interior colours and materials, ensure build quality is up there, crank up the production lines and figure out how to get people to drive them back-to-back with the competition.

The SRX was heads and shoulders above the competitive set on poor and slippery conditions. The incredible detail work done in upgrading the StabilTrak system for this application has resulted in a seamless method of helping drivers of all competencies through tough situations. Whether on sheer ice, deep or packed snow, the difference was dramatic. When grip is lost, the others rudely interrupt with loud, abrupt and disconcerting brake and throttle application. The SRX’s Stabilitrak is almost invisible. It‘s there and it’s marvelous but the driver has a much better sense of control. Where the others cut in taking away control, the new SRX’s system is like a coach, gently encouraging the car back into line. The difference will only be noticed by those fortunate enough to try the vehicles back to back on poor conditions. But it is indicative of the phenominal development work."

however the comments regarding wet handling are a little disconcerting. We will probably find out how valid those comments are in a couple of months..

The quote from Motor Trend, I think, is somewhat open to interpretation, but I believe you are reading too much into their comment (unless you really are interested in 9/10 driving in wet conditions).

“The problem here was both front wheels weren't spinning, but skidding wide of our intended path. We suspect the SRX's all-wheel-drive system is designed for, and is better suited to, getting a driver out of a slippery or icy situation from a stop rather than enhancing at-speed racetrack performance.”

I interpret this comment to mean the car is understeering at high speeds on the wet track and thus ultimate lap speeds are less than what could otherwise be obtained. I do not believe this is a comment directed at the SRX’s ability (particularly with Stabilitrack engaged) to safely negotiate curves. Although, again, this is not completely clear from their comment.

The article does not state whether they turned the stability programs off on the tested vehicles, which would not be unusual for track testing (although it is probably not possible to defeat the stability systems on all the vehicles they tested – some manufactures do not allow you to completely turn off their stability systems). I do find the lack of references to stability control systems throughout the article unusual and in particular its absence in this lead in statement:

“Then it rained on our parade. What seemed like bad luck at first became an even better demonstration of how well all four put their engines, brakes, suspensions, tires, and AWD systems to use on a wet surface.”

I believe stability control systems are even more important than AWD when it comes to remaining pointed in your intended direction on slippery curves. However, that was not the focus of the test.

MortnCyn’s posted quote from the Canadiandriver.com review is based on tests conducted in Michigan’s Upper Peninsula (the SRX’s were pre-production vehicles). Those comments are reflective of the conclusions of all the major automotive magazines and several other sources. I bet that I read over 10 reviews from that one event and all the magazines/newspapers/online sites were pretty much unanimous in their praise of the SRX’s winter abilities. Volvo was ranked very close by most reviewers with the others far behind. The X5 actually spun out in C&D’s emergency lane change test. Here is a link to Car & Drivers write-up with comments on all the vehicles.

http://caranddriver.com/article.asp?section_id=3&article_id=6980&page_number=5

All of this was a long winded way of saying I don’t think you have to worry about the SRX’s real world surefootedness in adverse conditions.

Just a comment on stability systems. I was rear ended a couple of years ago while driving a DeVille DTS at about 70 MPH. The guy who got me was in a big Ford truck and was doing in excess of 100 MPH. His impact point was the right half of the rear end. The car lurched a bit but I doubt if I went more than 2 feet out of my lane before being perfectly straightened out. I was on a long bridge (Howard Franklin between Tampa and St Pete) and was really grateful that I had been lucky enough to keep from going off.

I was talking to my salesman about missing the opportunity to do a swan dive into the bay. He said the stabilitrack saved us. My take was I am sure it's a good thing but it can't take all the credit. He put me in another DTS and we went out on the expressway. He had been to the Cadillac schools where they put them on skid pads and all kinds of fun things.

Bottom line was that I was amazed at how you can throw that car around by jerking from lane to lane and how fast it stabilizes. I won't own another car without stabilitrack. I knew I had seen the light come on in Corvettes a few times but thought the main resolution in those instances was really me and the handling characteristics of the Vett. Now I know that might not have been the case.

I am not advocating that owners fling their cars around they way we did on I-75, but I will emphasize that if you have stabilitrack that you never turn it off and that you remember what it can do to assist you if you have to take drastic action to avoid a collision. I live in Florida and traction isn't the concern it used to be in Minnesota. But cars can get sideways anywhere.

Quote from rcawood post- "All of this was a long winded way of saying I don’t think you have to worry about the SRX’s real world surefootedness in adverse conditions."
I guess that was the reason I posted the Canadian Driver comments. We do not drive on test tracks and not likely to start. Those that do drive the test tracks are driving on turf they know very well.

The rest of us are doing what mack1a was doing when he got rear-ended. As my 17-year old granddaughter says she would like to be-
"A professional driver on a closed course".