SRX vs. RX 350 - Page 2
Cadillac
 

Cadillac Forums | Help Us Help You | Advertise | Cadillac Parts | Cadillac News | Cadillac Classifieds / (Old System)

Cadillac Technical Archive | Cadillac Dealers | Cadillac Reviews | Cadillac Dealer Reviews | Cadillac Vendors

CadillacForums.com is the premier Cadillac Forum on the internet. Registered Users do not see the above ads.
+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 47
Cadillac SRX Second Generation Forum - 2010+ Discussion, SRX vs. RX 350 in Cadillac SRX Forums; Originally Posted by RightTurn I don't agree. The pressure is on GM and other car makers to provide economy...not power. ...
  1. #16
    Aron9000's Avatar
    Aron9000 is offline Cadillac Owners Master
    Automobile(s): Past: 95 Fleetwood, 91 Brougham. Now: 92 Lexus SC300
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Nashville, TN
    Posts
    5,223

    Re: SRX vs. RX 350

    Quote Originally Posted by RightTurn View Post
    I don't agree. The pressure is on GM and other car makers to provide economy...not power. IMO, the muscle-car years are quickly coming to a close. The focus is on MPG, not MPH.
    No the focus should be having your cake and eating it too.

    Go look at Ford's Ecoboost V6 in the Ford Flex. The base V6 AWD model gets the same gas mileage as the Ecoboost V6 AWD model, 16 city/22 higway for both. The base V6 has 262hp/248lbft torque, Ecoboost V6 is 355hp/350lbft torque.

    Anyways, my point is that Ford and other manufacturers have figured out how to make a big heavy car fast and fuel efficient. Why can't Cadillac do this??

  2. #17
    RightTurn's Avatar
    RightTurn is offline Cadillac Owners 10000+ Posts
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Keep Right™
    Posts
    41,067

    Re: SRX vs. RX 350

    Quote Originally Posted by Aron9000 View Post
    Why can't Cadillac do this??
    Why should they? The new SRX appears to be a winner for GM, and more power to them. I maintain that the "typical" crossover buyer isn't looking for a performance vehicle. In the case of the SRX, we are able to get utility and a bit of luxury for a reasonable price. In that regard, the SRX delivers.

    This is why prospective owners take test drives--if it isn't what they want, there are plenty of other vehicles to buy. You can bet that if people weren't buying, then Cadillac/GM would be scrambling to improve their offering.

  3. #18
    Barry626 is offline Cadillac Owners Fanatic
    Automobile(s): 2010 SRX
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Age
    57
    Posts
    213

    Re: SRX vs. RX 350

    Quote Originally Posted by Bee iLL View Post
    Not to bash on the SRX, but I do agree they could have used a more powerful engine. Coming from a V8 Jeep Grand Cherokee as my daily driver, the one thing I noticed was you really need to step on the pedal to get the car moving… And I was test driving a Turbo. Once I actually got on the pedal, I thought acceleration was decent, but when I was trying to just ease into the acceleration like in my jeep,
    I came from a CTS-V in fact I traded my 2009 for my SRX & power is just fine!
    Anyone that expects a SUV/Crossover to be a sports car is down right brain dead.

    Just maybe this country of ours needs to go back to days of less then 200 HP...
    Just maybe we will have less people in the cemeteries & more on the rd enjoying their rides!

  4. #19
    stevec5375's Avatar
    stevec5375 is offline Cadillac Owners Connoisseur
    Automobile(s): 2010 SRX/3.0L Premium/FWD/Platinum Ice/Shale
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Austin, TX, USA
    Posts
    1,627

    Re: SRX vs. RX 350

    I just picked up my new SRX yesterday. While car shopping, I was considering the Acura MDX and later discovered the SRX. I ultimately went with a SRX Premium for mainly two reasons: less expensive and better fuel economy.

    I read all the reviews where they panned the SRX for acceleration. However, being 53, my lead-footed days are in my past. I am more concerned about the engines ability to move the car adequately and be efficient.

    The MDX economy with its 3.7 L engine was 16/21 (AWD). I opted for the SRX (FWD) with 18/25.

    It's all about trade offs. If you want the acceleration factor, go with the Turbo SRX. However, your gas mileage is going to suffer.

  5. #20
    Lord Cadillac is offline Cadillac Maniac
    Automobile(s): Cadillac Escalade
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Royal Palm Beach, Florida
    Age
    43
    Posts
    13,617

    Re: SRX vs. RX 350

    Quote Originally Posted by stevec5375 View Post
    being 53, my lead-footed days are in my past. I am more concerned about the engines ability to move the car adequately and be efficient.
    While I believe Cadillac is looking for a more youthful image, I'm pretty sure your demographic is the intended target for this vehicle: People who've had their fun (on the road) and are simply looking for a comfortable, reliable automobile (Toyota Camry) to get them from A to B.
    Have an iPhone? Than you can get involved right now. Click here to download Cars Connected.

  6. #21
    RightTurn's Avatar
    RightTurn is offline Cadillac Owners 10000+ Posts
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Keep Right™
    Posts
    41,067

    Re: SRX vs. RX 350

    Well, thanks for the compliment, Sal. Let me go get my teeth out of the jar so I can respond.

    Naturally, once again I disagree...at least partially. I believe the demographic is EXACTLY THE SAME as the Lexus RX and any other "luxury" crossover... soccer moms, golfers, anyone desiring a vehicle with a bit more cargo area while offering upscale appearance.

  7. #22
    Lord Cadillac is offline Cadillac Maniac
    Automobile(s): Cadillac Escalade
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Royal Palm Beach, Florida
    Age
    43
    Posts
    13,617

    Re: SRX vs. RX 350



    It's interesting to me that even Ford isn't giving the 2011 Lincoln MKX the EcoBoost engine as an option.. That right there (with the much improved appearance) would have given it an edge over the SRX and RX350.

    While Cadillac is probably doing the right thing by competing with Lexus with the SRX, I'm with the people who feel that job should be left to Buick. I don't think Buick should be going head to head with Toyota and I really don't think Cadillac should be going head to head with Lexus. Not anymore..

    I've always felt Cadillac should have gone after Mercedes over BMW - as Merc's are more luxurious than sporty - but with their AMG vehicles, are extremely impressive performance-wise.

    It's fine that Cadillac sells a Crossover that I would never even consider - and I'm not alone.. How difficult would it have been to use the 3.6 liter direct injected six cylinder? A little more performance for those who'd appreciate it wouldn't be such a bad thing. I know the amount of customers for this type of vehicle would probably be few and far between - but how many V-Series vehicles do you see on the road? Somehow that makes sense but a more powerful SRX doesn't? I mean - they just had one (a more powerful SRX) with the previous model...

    The new SRX is a much nicer looking vehicle (to me and most other people) - so it's bound to sell more. However, I'm sure the 2009 SRX would have sold even more if it had the interior and exterior of this new model. I doubt the SRX is selling so well NOW because it's a better Crossover SUV. It's selling first and foremost because it's a new vehicle - and next - because it doesn't look like a wagon...

    It's not just the SRX I find weak either.. The CTS needs an option for a more powerful engine as well. The CTS-V is overkill for most people. Something in between would be nice...

    Quote Originally Posted by RightTurn View Post
    Well, thanks for the compliment, Sal. Let me go get my teeth out of the jar so I can respond.

    Naturally, once again I disagree...at least partially. I believe the demographic is EXACTLY THE SAME as the Lexus RX and any other "luxury" crossover... soccer moms, golfers, anyone desiring a vehicle with a bit more cargo area while offering upscale appearance.
    Have an iPhone? Than you can get involved right now. Click here to download Cars Connected.

  8. #23
    RightTurn's Avatar
    RightTurn is offline Cadillac Owners 10000+ Posts
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Keep Right™
    Posts
    41,067

    Re: SRX vs. RX 350

    I have to wonder how much of the "GM = Government Motors" is affecting those decisions. I'm sure GM is having to take a "safer" path to economic recovery at this point. Maybe Sube is right and next year's SRX will offer the CTS engine, or similar.

  9. #24
    Lord Cadillac is offline Cadillac Maniac
    Automobile(s): Cadillac Escalade
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Royal Palm Beach, Florida
    Age
    43
    Posts
    13,617

    Re: SRX vs. RX 350

    Quote Originally Posted by RightTurn View Post
    I have to wonder how much of the "GM = Government Motors" is affecting those decisions. I'm sure GM is having to take a "safer" path to economic recovery at this point. Maybe Sube is right and next year's SRX will offer the CTS engine, or similar.
    Yeah, that's a shame regarding GM's new owners.. They must be under the impression that if GM went completely or nearly completely "green", they'd be considered the best option in the industry. Unfortunately for them, there are many other factors. I know that nearly 99% of the drivers on the road don't care about things like which wheels power the vehicle, handling, power, 0-60, 1/4 mile / trap speed times - it's all really irrelevant. Then again, what percentage of people own Cadillacs? Or better yet, what percentage of people SHOULD own Cadillacs? Personally, I think they'd be better off selling fewer automobiles at a higher price (fewer customers, same profit) - catering to less of the crowd that doesn't care for a vehicle that stands out in the areas of design and/or performance. Maybe they're trying to be everything to everybody instead of focusing on being the best...
    Have an iPhone? Than you can get involved right now. Click here to download Cars Connected.

  10. #25
    tsenior is offline Cadillac Owners Member
    Automobile(s): 2010 SRX
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    17

    Re: SRX vs. RX 350

    Going back to the original post...I think neither vehic is good for your situation. I would even look at the GMC Acadia. Very spacious and nice ride, sportier than Enclave. And a roomy third row seat. A fully loaded Acadia is cheaper than fully loaded SRX. Don't get me wrong ..I have the 2010 performance SRX and I like most things about it. I'm not, however, 100% convinced I made the best purchase. Volvo's are very nice also.

  11. #26
    Bee iLL's Avatar
    Bee iLL is offline Cadillac Owners Fanatic
    Automobile(s): 2007 Raven Black STS-V, 2010 Radiant Silver SRX Premium 2.8T
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Chicago
    Age
    31
    Posts
    470

    Re: SRX vs. RX 350

    Quote Originally Posted by Barry626 View Post
    I came from a CTS-V in fact I traded my 2009 for my SRX & power is just fine!
    Anyone that expects a SUV/Crossover to be a sports car is down right brain dead.

    Just maybe this country of ours needs to go back to days of less then 200 HP...
    Just maybe we will have less people in the cemeteries & more on the rd enjoying their rides!
    I never expected it to be a sports car, nor did I ever say I did, which was why I was comparing it to my grand cherokee. If you think a grand cherokee is a sports car, then it doesn't surprise me that you traded in your cts-v. If my 6 year old jeep has no problems getting up and going, why should a brand new cadillac?

    HP doesn't kill people... STUPID DRIVERS KILL PEOPLE! Unfortunantly, thats not illegal. I can be driving a Prius and eventually (real LONG eventually) get it going to a 100MPH. How safe is that?

  12. #27
    lslpawpaw is offline Cadillac Owners Member
    Automobile(s): 2010 SRX Premium 2.8T AWD
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    18

    Re: SRX vs. RX 350

    Having just traded an '07 Lexus RX350 for a SRX 2.8T, the engine power experience is more than satisfactory.

    The 2.8T provides a much different feel and sound (quieter during 'normal' acceleration) than the 3.0 standard RSX engine. If all that Cadillac offered were the 2.8T in the SRX, I believe the argument and debate about engine power and driveability would never have surfaced, or would have been a very minor topic of discussion.

    My $0.02

    Barry
    2.8T AWD Premium

  13. #28
    TheCaptain's Avatar
    TheCaptain is offline Canadian SRX Mod
    Automobile(s): 14 ATS AWD 3.6L Performance - Phantom Grey Metallic
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Moosomin Saskatchewan
    Age
    28
    Posts
    2,831

    Re: SRX vs. RX 350

    Quote Originally Posted by RightTurn View Post
    I don't agree. The pressure is on GM and other car makers to provide economy...not power. IMO, the muscle-car years are quickly coming to a close. The focus is on MPG, not MPH.
    I vote this for Quote of the YEAR. But it's not just your opinion, it's whats happening.
    The only thing is, the public still can't see it yet... or seriously doesn't want to/ can't I mean... whoops! I didn't say anything!

  14. #29
    thebigjimsho's Avatar
    thebigjimsho is offline Cadillac Owners 10000+ Posts
    Automobile(s): ZIP
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    In the barrel of a gun...
    Posts
    49,536

    Re: SRX vs. RX 350

    Quote Originally Posted by Aron9000 View Post
    No the focus should be having your cake and eating it too.

    Go look at Ford's Ecoboost V6 in the Ford Flex. The base V6 AWD model gets the same gas mileage as the Ecoboost V6 AWD model, 16 city/22 higway for both. The base V6 has 262hp/248lbft torque, Ecoboost V6 is 355hp/350lbft torque.

    Anyways, my point is that Ford and other manufacturers have figured out how to make a big heavy car fast and fuel efficient. Why can't Cadillac do this??
    Real world mpg figures have been quite different. The ecoboost makes good power, no doubt. But its real world fuel mileage has not been able to top similarly powered V8s...

  15. #30
    Bee iLL's Avatar
    Bee iLL is offline Cadillac Owners Fanatic
    Automobile(s): 2007 Raven Black STS-V, 2010 Radiant Silver SRX Premium 2.8T
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Chicago
    Age
    31
    Posts
    470

    Re: SRX vs. RX 350

    Quote Originally Posted by Lord Cadillac View Post
    Personally, I think they'd be better off selling fewer automobiles at a higher price (fewer customers, same profit) - catering to less of the crowd that doesn't care for a vehicle that stands out in the areas of design and/or performance.
    How about that as quote of the year? I agree completely. Not trying to offend anyone, but if you buy a Cadillac, last thing you should be worried about is MPG. If having to spend more on gas is going to break your bank, you should probably be buying a Buick or Chevy.

Quick Reply Quick Reply

Register Now

Please enter the name by which you would like to log-in and be known on this site.
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.

Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



Bookmarks

Cadillac Posting Rules

  • You may post new threads
  • You may post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Read about Lincoln | Buick | Kia Forte Forum
Need products for your Cadillac? Check out your options at the links below:

custom floor mats | Cadillac Chrome and Black Chrome Wheels | window tinting