Luxury Crossover Comparison Test: 2010 SRX Dead Last

[TuffG929]

Originally Posted by Edmunds

Americans don't like wagons. Never mind about the killer combination of versatility and drivability; coolness counts in this country, and the old-fashioned station wagon hasn't been hip since the mullet went out of style. But now traditional body-on-frame SUVs have fallen from grace as well, victims of volatile gas prices, inherent packaging inefficiencies and a burgeoning sense that bigger isn't always better. That's where so-called crossovers come in: car-like underneath but SUV-like in appearance and elevation, they're the latest in wagons for those who wouldn't be caught dead in one.

Our quarry in this Edmunds Comparison Test is the best new entrant in the rapidly expanding Compact Luxury Crossover segment. The field consists of four notables that have joined the ranks within the past year: the 2009 Audi Q5, 2010 Cadillac SRX, 2010 Mercedes-Benz GLK350 and 2010 Volvo XC60. Since we limited ourselves to rookies, respected veterans like the Acura RDX, BMW X3 and Infiniti EX35 went uninvited. As for the redesigned 2010 Lexus RX350, we determined that its midsize interior dimensions and doughy ride would clash with this crew's intimate cabins and capable suspenders.

Shoppers in this segment want more than just typical crossover virtues like good visibility, secure handling and stout styling. They're also after an upscale cabin, premium features and confident power. Practicality counts, too, and that includes price, as these "CUVs" start at less than $40,000 -- well shy of cost-no-object territory. Details below on our winner by a hair, our loser in a landslide, and the wholly respectable tie for second place.

Link

[Quickening]

Of course the SRX got last. The crappy 3.0 engine is wrecking this car in reviews. Though Edmunds is the first I've seen to complain about the suspenion, everyone else seemed to love the suspension/rid/handling.

[CUtiger08]

As much as I would love to say "I knew it" in regards to the SRX being less than best-in-class... they really should have either done all base models or all models with $6-10k in options. I doubt the overall outcome would have changed, but even I will acknowledge the unequal terms of this test. Adding AWD defiantely wouldn't have helped in any real way... the 2.8T might have helped, but it would have leapfrogged the others in price.

Also, in regards to not bringing along the RX because it's roomier: someone needs to buy a tapemeasure

RX350: 188 inches long, 108 inch wb, 74 inch wide
SRX 3.0: 190 inches long, 110.5 in wb, 75 inch wide

I don't think you could make a more direct size comparison without using directly rebadged models... and the SRX is a hair bigger in every way. Either the SRX is too big for this test, or the RX is the right size.

[mgescuro]

So to translate....
Despite being larger, it has less room inside.
The car is fat.
The car is cheaper because it has less available, because it wasn't optioned identically to the others in the comparo.
The car has some other neat items and has class competitive materials.

But when you add everything together, what you get is still a pretty mediocre car that may or may not be class competitive, in a segment where the competition is very stiff.

I still like that tagline.... "Cadillac aimed lower, and still missed the mark."

[genjy]

The Volvo XC60 is gorgeous, inside and outside.

Too bad it doesn't come with a manual transmission.

[TuffG929]

If they replaced the GLK350, XC60, and Q5 with the RX350, MDX, and MKX I'd like to think it would've performed at least a little better.

[ChevyRules]

Originally Posted by TuffG929

If they replaced the GLK350, XC60, and Q5 with the RX350, MDX, and MKX I'd like to think it would've performed at least a little better.

Those vehicles are Buick's territory( I would argue the Volvo is too). Cadillac is( or should be) aiming for the Benz, BMW, Audi, and Infiniti crowd. And with the base engine, have failed horribly.

Sorry, the SRX deserved this last place finish.

[TuffG929]

Originally Posted by ChevyRules

Those vehicles are Buick's territory( I would argue the Volvo is too). Cadillac is( or should be) aiming for the Benz, BMW, Audi, and Infiniti crowd. And with the base engine, have failed horribly.

Sorry, the SRX deserved this last place finish.

Agreed...they should makes plans to move the SRX to alpha or back to sigma.....It's a great car but it shouldn't be a Cadillac.

[genjy]

Originally Posted by ChevyRules

Those vehicles are Buick's territory

Just because Buick claims it is a Lexus competitor, it doesn't make it true.

Volvo is around Buick's and Lincoln's level... but Lexus is definitely not playing with those guys.

[CUtiger08]

Originally Posted by TuffG929

If they replaced the GLK350, XC60, and Q5 with the RX350, MDX, and MKX I'd like to think it would've performed at least a little better.

MDX is way bigger... it's X5/Q7 range, not X3/Q5, the RDX is closer but it's on the small side. I do think the SRX could at least keep up with an MKX better... but then, the MKX is a few years old now, so that's to be expected.

Originally Posted by ChevyRules

Those vehicles are Buick's territory( I would argue the Volvo is too). Cadillac is( or should be) aiming for the Benz, BMW, Audi, and Infiniti crowd. And with the base engine, have failed horribly.

Sorry, the SRX deserved this last place finish.

I agree that Cadillac should be going after BMW/Infiniti side of the segment... but the current SRX is clearly aiming for toward the middle of the segment, so IMO it can be compared to just about any member of the $35-45k small CUV crowd. And nearly everyone agrees that the SRX is a direct move against the Lexus RX.

And I agree with you that the softer and/or cheaper side of this market is Buick's job... if this car were a $33k Buick instead of a $36k Cadillac, I bet it would have gotten a far better reception from just about everyone. Then offer a $40k SRX on Alpha to take on the X3 and other sportier offerings.

[Danko]

Problem with some vehicles, especially those from Sweden, is that they are so ugly, some people will not want to get in and see if they are any good or not. I will never understand how a country with such beautiful women can have such fugly cars......... but ............. The Caddy IS the best looking of the bunch by more than a little. Now, how about some h.p. and screw the experts and Al Gore, too?!?!?!!!!!

[member12]

And this would have sucked if it were a Buick too.

Bad product is bad product.

[mgescuro]

Originally Posted by ChevyRules

Sorry, the SRX deserved this last place finish.

Disappointing, but I agree.

[Buick61]

Exactly where it deserves to be. It's an underpowered, overweight, Mexican-built halfbreed.

Too bad the whole line can't be clunkered with the other garbage on dealer lots.

[nferr]

The base engine is a killer in this car. It's just not good enough. GM should have realized it right away from it's own prototype testing. Put the 3.6DI in the SRX and you have a nice powerplant. Other than that the car's fine and very competitive.