: Looked under the hood of the 2011 SRX 3.0, and I swore I saw a Renault sized engine!



cadillacnuvo
04-09-11, 12:47 AM
I test drove the Base and Luxury SRX recently. I didn't haggle the price, but they did quote:

Base $34,000.00 MSRP

Luxury $38,700.00 MSRP

I believe I can do better.

BUT, the engine reminded me of a Renault that I drove as an expat overseas for a while. Spunky engine, cool features, but that dude just didn't perform spunky more than three years. It went downhill fast after about 21 months, while friends were driving their 5.3 engines and loving life five years or more.

I swore I'd never get another spunky engine again, regardless of features or warranty.

Any cause for alarm here with the SRX 3.0 or should I just never peek under the hood again?

c5 rv
04-09-11, 08:14 AM
This is one of the reasons I bought a V8 sedan last year while I still could. I still remember the series of 4 cylinder domestic company cars I had in the 1980s that started wheezing with no power at about 50K miles - when I could order a new car.

TRMN8R1
04-09-11, 09:05 AM
Well if you test drove the car then your impression of what you need should have been 'felt in the seat'. Personally, I don't really care what it looks like under the hood, but rather what it is in a motor that I need for doing what I do. The 3.0 suits my needs very well. FYI, there's plenty of threads addressing this, just do the SEARCH.......................best of luck to you.

cadillacnuvo
04-09-11, 09:08 AM
Would the powertrain warranty cover this issue for at least 5 years and 100,000 miles? Better said would one feel safe with a 3.0 SRX engine with that warranty scenario through its validity?

This is my ONLY stumbling block on buying this car today as I've had a very bad experience with these low L / high revolution engines that run like mini race cars, then just sputtered out as stated above.

I hear the 3.6L is coming out in 2012, but I need a vehicle in the next two weeks, so that isn't an option.

cadillacnuvo
04-09-11, 09:12 AM
TRM,

Thanks on the search engine advice.

You'll never be able to understand the sputter effect over time in a test run. It took me about 18 months to begin the spiral into noticeable performance issues on the Renault. I did test run the Base and Luxury, and both are equivalent as far as performance driving the vehicles. I did get that Renault feel during the test drives on their engines, but I just blew it off as I knew for a fact that I was in a Cadillac. LOL After the Luxury test I asked the sales dude to open the hood as I just had this strange association running through my head. When he did, I simply couldn't believe my eyes. It looked identical to the old Renault, and it brought back bad memories.

I don't want that bad Renault experience to overshadow those great experiences owners here are able to share with their Cadillac technology, so I brought this concern to the forum. (And, for the record most mechanics told me you can only expect less performance over time in a low liter engine in the Renault, and those cars are ideal for TRUE city driving scenarios, not highway driving scenarios, which I was accustomed to over there.)

Regardless, I really was impressed with everything else on the SRX and the price point was solid IMO. Perhaps I should have never opened the hood, but that was going to happen sooner or later.

Ponyman
04-09-11, 09:46 AM
If you don't like it, or think you won't like it down the road, then you will never be satisfied with it. Either wait for the 3.6 in the 2012, or go buy something else with a proper sized looking engine under the hood. It's that simple.

cadillacnuvo
04-09-11, 10:20 AM
If you don't like it, or think you won't like it down the road, then you will never be satisfied with it. Either wait for the 3.6 in the 2012, or go buy something else with a proper sized looking engine under the hood. It's that simple.

You are simply confusing "proper sized looking engine" with a box full of repairs that would put fear in anyone, while listening to the mechanics state "what did you expect from a low liter engine". Yes, over time most were on a first named basis, and giving me their true insight into the low liter engines from their personal experiences. I'm referring to Renault, not Cadillac. I'm hoping there is a major difference in technology.

I just want to make sure that isn't the case with the SRX, and the warranty covers such low liter engine fears for at least 5 years or 100,000.

Don't read into to it any other way.

stevec5375
04-09-11, 12:12 PM
Years ago computers used to take up floors of buildings too. Now you can hold one in your hand that does tons more. Don't confuse size with performance in the 21st century. :)

cadillacnuvo
04-09-11, 01:09 PM
Years ago computers used to take up floors of buildings too. Now you can hold one in your hand that does tons more. Don't confuse size with performance in the 21st century. :)

:thumbsup:

Too bad Renault wouldn't accept that in lieu of paying the repair invoice when I had to take my car out of the shop post warranty. Is that the case with Cadillac's SRX 3.0? I hope so.

BUT, is the SRX 3.0 engine covered 100% for 5 years and 100,000 miles?

That's the only topic not addressed here. Please advise.

PJ1520
04-09-11, 02:10 PM
Any aspect of a vehicle that I know in hindsight will aggravate or worry me every time I put the key in the ignition rises to the top of the stack during my "next vehicle" research and decision process. For me, if the engine and on the road performance FOR BOTH MY WANTS AND NEEDS doesn't float my boat, that vehicle gets wacked from my search, AND EARLY!!!! But that is me, not you. This is a $35,000-$40,000 purchase. Get it right, FOR YOU, up front. Trust your gut.

PJ

TheCaptain
04-09-11, 04:44 PM
... Don't confuse size with performance in the 21st century. :)

Are you on the right website for that slogan? :kari4:
:zing:


:histeric:

garytexas
04-09-11, 11:02 PM
Now THAT was funny

Smokin' SRX
04-10-11, 10:39 AM
Not sure what year Renault you had, but motors/gaskets/exhaust/elec ignition/on-board computers have leaped incredibly in last 10 years. Yes a 3.0 is a small V-6 for sure, but the new models will keep you moving well for years to come. However, my position is well known here on the 3.0 engine. I wish I had gotten the Turbo, but only because I have a Plutonium left foot, LOL. But not a deal-breaker for me.

The 3.0 has plenty of motivation for daily drives/merges etc, especially with the 6-speed tranny. I believe whatever you feel on Test Driving will get better after break-in. Then level -off, for many miles. But if you are like me and love to surprise Mustang GT's, you may be disappointed. The SRX needs to hit 4,000 RPM to get into gutsy torque. It does it willingly and smoothly, but I just like more. Yet I smile everytime I drive her. Personal and subjective.

Yes ,the 5 Year/100K mile warranty covers things like compression/valve/gasket failure in the engine. Ignition items like coil/wires are covered under the 4 year/ 50K miles bumper to bumper.

So test drive, then test drive! Find and test the Turbo if $$ is a minor concern. (no longer order-able) That WILL make you smile! If you're happy on day 1, you'll be happy on day 3,001.

Look into a 2 year lease perhaps? Then if very unhappy in 2 years, get the 3.6 L !!
Best wishes.

SS

stevec5375
04-10-11, 11:06 AM
Not sure what year Renault you had, but motors/gaskets/exhaust/elec ignition/on-board computers have leaped incredibly in last 10 years. Yes a 3.0 is a small V-6 for sure, but the new models will keep you moving well for years to come. However, my position is well known here on the 3.0 engine. I wish I had gotten the Turbo, but only because I have a Plutonium left foot, LOL. But not a deal-breaker for me.

The 3.0 has plenty of motivation for daily drives/merges etc, especially with the 6-speed tranny. I believe whatever you feel on Test Driving will get better after break-in. Then level -off, for many miles. But if you are like me and love to surprise Mustang GT's, you may be disappointed. The SRX needs to hit 4,000 RPM to get into gutsy torque. It does it willingly and smoothly, but I just like more. Yet I smile everytime I drive her. Personal and subjective.

Yes ,the 5 Year/100K mile warranty covers things like compression/valve/gasket failure in the engine. Ignition items like coil/wires are covered under the 4 year/ 50K miles bumper to bumper.

So test drive, then test drive! Find and test the Turbo if $$ is a minor concern. (no longer order-able) That WILL make you smile! If you're happy on day 1, you'll be happy on day 3,001.

Look into a 2 year lease perhaps? Then if very unhappy in 2 years, get the 3.6 L !!
Best wishes.

SS


Plutonium LEFT foot? You press the gas pedal with your left foot? Hmm...

Do you think that because the SRX is getting the 3.6L engine in 2012 that one could extrapolate that Cadillac is admitting they put an engine that is too small in the current models?

Smokin' SRX
04-10-11, 11:15 AM
Plutonium LEFT foot? You press the gas pedal with your left foot? Hmm...

Do you think that because the SRX is getting the 3.6L engine in 2012 that one could extrapolate that Cadillac is admitting they put an engine that is too small in the current models?

YUP! The RIGHT one is Kryptonite! LOL Haven't had coffee yet!

All brands increas eng litres over time. Perhaps to get initial lower MPG on new models?? In our case, the 3.6 and 3.0 get almost identical MPG, based on useage in other (often heavier!) GM sleds...........

SS

stevec5375
04-10-11, 11:28 AM
YUP! The RIGHT one is Kryptonite! LOL Haven't had coffee yet!

All brands increas eng litres over time. Perhaps to get initial lower MPG on new models?? In our case, the 3.6 and 3.0 get almost identical MPG, based on useage in other (often heavier!) GM sleds...........

SS

I always wonder if the less-than-stellar MPG on the 2010 model is because the 3.0L engine is underpowered and having to strain somewhat and thus, causes the MPG to suffer. If the 3.6L gets almost identical mileage, then this seems to bear that out. No?

I have never been able to get over 17 MPG in town with my SRX and now it has about 9K miles on it so it should be broken in.

PJ1520
04-10-11, 12:14 PM
Smokin........I think you hit the nail on the head.

In my mind, a harder working, smaller displacement engine can lose some if not most of it's fuel mileage advantage with the more spirited driver.....which might be us. I drone on in this forum about the highway fuel mileage I get in my Gen I SRX, but that is with an anal-retentive, conscious effort on my part to max out fuel mileage. But then that errant right foot of mine takes on a life of its own and my mind actually listens to it.

Although the Gen I 4.6L V8 N* is EPA-rated 20mpg highway, at 65mph on cruise 22mpg is possible. Last Sunday on a 100 mile trip up and back from NH I hit 23.0mpg, the highest highway mileage I have ever been able to squeeze out of the SRX. Otherwise, I am me; and the mileage plummets.

My wife's attitude? We paid for the motor and we are going to USE it, all of it!!! She cares not a lick about fuel mileage.

PJ

Smokin' SRX
04-10-11, 02:31 PM
Guys, I wish I could get 17MPG/local with my X.. I guess I'm always rushing and it IS a 4500 lbs. sled. (mine anyway) But highway should be 26-28MPG, with the 6 speed tranny, IMHO. ( I average 22MPG with the AWD, if I drive gently. Steve has FWD) The EPA test posted on window sticker (says17/23 mpg) drives a natural highway loop and eliminates my Kryptonite right foot from the equation. It's the X.

Yes PJ, no doubt I am the critical problem for MPG, in my case. I do have to hit 4-5K RPM on a regular basis, to attain acceleration that I desire. I'll guess the torquer 3.6 in my previous (heavier @ 5K lbs) Enclave prompted me to reach those levels only 25% of the time, from memory. I recall because I am a "noise nerd" and I hate hi-revving eng noise.

But I nit-pick ,as the X is a basically quiet ride, and I remain overall satisfied, but not elated, w/ the 3.0..........still wish I got the Turbo though! :crying:

SS

stevec5375
04-10-11, 03:18 PM
Guys, I wish I could get 17MPG/local with my X.. I guess I'm always rushing and it IS a 4500 lbs. sled. (mine anyway) But highway should be 26-28MPG, with the 6 speed tranny, IMHO. ( I average 22MPG with the AWD, if I drive gently. Steve has FWD) The EPA test posted on window sticker (says17/23 mpg) drives a natural highway loop and eliminates my Kryptonite right foot from the equation. It's the X.

Yes PJ, no doubt I am the critical problem for MPG, in my case. I do have to hit 4-5K RPM on a regular basis, to attain acceleration that I desire. I'll guess the torquer 3.6 in my previous (heavier @ 5K lbs) Enclave prompted me to reach those levels only 25% of the time, from memory. I recall because I am a "noise nerd" and I hate hi-revving eng noise.

But I nit-pick ,as the X is a basically quiet ride, and I remain overall satisfied, but not elated, w/ the 3.0..........still wish I got the Turbo though! :crying:

SS

Smokin, are you one of those hurry-up-and-wait drivers? If so, you should come on down to Austin. We have plenty of those drivers here so you'd fit right in. ;) They're drawn to red lights like bees to flowers. The yellow light means step on the gas. LOL!

cadillacnuvo
04-10-11, 11:45 PM
Not sure what year Renault you had, but motors/gaskets/exhaust/elec ignition/on-board computers have leaped incredibly in last 10 years. Yes a 3.0 is a small V-6 for sure, but the new models will keep you moving well for years to come. However, my position is well known here on the 3.0 engine. I wish I had gotten the Turbo, but only because I have a Plutonium left foot, LOL. But not a deal-breaker for me.

The 3.0 has plenty of motivation for daily drives/merges etc, especially with the 6-speed tranny. I believe whatever you feel on Test Driving will get better after break-in. Then level -off, for many miles. But if you are like me and love to surprise Mustang GT's, you may be disappointed. The SRX needs to hit 4,000 RPM to get into gutsy torque. It does it willingly and smoothly, but I just like more. Yet I smile everytime I drive her. Personal and subjective.

Yes ,the 5 Year/100K mile warranty covers things like compression/valve/gasket failure in the engine. Ignition items like coil/wires are covered under the 4 year/ 50K miles bumper to bumper.

So test drive, then test drive! Find and test the Turbo if $$ is a minor concern. (no longer order-able) That WILL make you smile! If you're happy on day 1, you'll be happy on day 3,001.

Look into a 2 year lease perhaps? Then if very unhappy in 2 years, get the 3.6 L !!
Best wishes.

SS

Thanks for the input.

cadillacnuvo
04-10-11, 11:51 PM
I always wonder if the less-than-stellar MPG on the 2010 model is because the 3.0L engine is underpowered and having to strain somewhat and thus, causes the MPG to suffer. If the 3.6L gets almost identical mileage, then this seems to bear that out. No?

I have never been able to get over 17 MPG in town with my SRX and now it has about 9K miles on it so it should be broken in.

Wow! Only 17? That's Tahoe Flex numbers there. LOL

cadillacnuvo
04-10-11, 11:53 PM
Plutonium LEFT foot? You press the gas pedal with your left foot? Hmm...

Do you think that because the SRX is getting the 3.6L engine in 2012 that one could extrapolate that Cadillac is admitting they put an engine that is too small in the current models?

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^That's my BIGGEST WORRY!