Review: 2010 Cadillac SRX 2.8T

[ChevyRules]

Review: 2010 Cadillac SRX 2.8T
Another review of the 2.8 Turbo V6 in the SRX is out in the wild
www.gminsidenews.com
March 04, 2010

After my first run in with the SRX I had strong opinions, both good and bad. The new SRX is a valid contender in this automotive segment and pushes the envelope for Cadillac both in quality and as a class competitive product. My largest gripe was that the base powertrain is weak and affected the driving experience. A simple question: would the optional turbo V6 engine fix the driving experience?

The main highlight of the SRX Turbo is larger engine which is funny because the engine in not actually larger because it is a 2.8 liter while the base V6 is a 3.0 liter. The extra power in the this V6 really comes from the turbo, putting out 300 hp and 295 ft-lb to all four wheels all with max torque coming at 2000 rpm. The all wheel drive system is the torque vectoring unit from Haldex. This is the same unit that made its debut in the now dead Saab TurboX a few years back and can transfer up to 90% of the torque to the rear wheels at any given time. The torque can also be distributed between the wheels side to side. All of this gets put to the ground through a six speed automatic transmission with manual shift capabilities. So the question still remains: does this extra power fix the SRX driving experience?

The answer is yes and no. Yes, the driving experience is much better. In fact, leaps and bounds better. In normal and spirited driving the car does not feel strained like the base 3.0 liter V6. Even pulling away from a stoplight, you notice the difference. In normal driving the engine does not feel like it is working hard. The revs are easily kept under 3ooo rpm’s unless pushed. When pushed, the engine responds quickly with no noticeable lag. The turbo is going almost constantly whenever you have your foot on the gas. Something to note is that you cannot put the needle into the red on the turbo gauge. Why would you have the red there when you cannot put the needle in that zone? The first thing people said to me was to put it in the red and I had to respond sadly, “It does not go that high.”

More...

[mbukukanyau]

What if you held it at gear in manual mode and gunned it?

[RamJet502]

"The downside to this engine is the gas mileage. Rated at 15/22, this engine could definitely be described as thirsty. I cannot decide what is worse about the mileage; the fact that it is just terrible for this vehicle class, or that it is coming from the engine putting out the power that this vehicle really needs."

Note to GM, fix this ASAP. Letting the consumer decide between an underpowered engine with acceptable efficiency and a competent engine with sub par efficiency is not a winning formula.

[vanshmack]

Seems like the SRX powertrain equation results in a lose-lose.

Pick the 3.0 DI and the performance sucks.
Pick the 2.8T and the efficiency sucks.

Is it 1989 all over again?

Bottom line is, the 3.0 DI is a useless boat-anchor with no practical reason for it's existance. This motor needs one of two things to happen: Rework the bore & stroke so it has some semblance of torque or discontinue it and pretend it never happened.

[RamJet502]

Originally Posted by vanshmack

Is it 1989 all over again?

These idiots can't keep making the same mistakes. If the 2.8T is going to get the same efficiency as a V8 with less power why not just offer a V8 with more power?

[DetroitIron]

GM needs to think this through better. Otherwise, they have another Cimarron on their hands. More money and less capable than another GM brand.

[vanshmack]

Originally Posted by RamJet502

These idiots can't keep making the same mistakes. If the 2.8T is going to get the same efficiency as a V8 with less power why not just offer a V8 with more power?

COMPLETELY agree. Every "V6-makes-V8-power-but-with-better-mpg" scheme has turned out to be a bad joke. Whether it's GM's DI 3.0 or Ford's Ecoboost V6, it seems to be either or, but never the combination that is always hyped.

[smithb]

The engines and lack of a third row option are the only reasons I haven't replaced my 1st gen SRX. The engines are pathetic. Even the mileage on the 3.0 isn't good, especially when you look at the real-world numbers from numerous reviews. I would rather have the 2.0T from my wife's Sky that could pump out 290 hp and 340 lb-ft with the factory kit for $500. I'm sure it isn't as "refined" as the current Cadillac engines, but you can isolate the NVH from the vehicle (especially when the vehicle is that small) and when you get 28mpg on the highway, I don't think most people would care if the noise was isolated.

[megeebee]

Originally Posted by RamJet502

These idiots can't keep making the same mistakes. If the 2.8T is going to get the same efficiency as a V8 with less power why not just offer a V8 with more power?

If it's such a bad vehicle, and its creators such "idiots", why is it selling so well?

.

[RamJet502]

Originally Posted by megeebee

If it's such a bad vehicle, and its creators such "idiots", why is it selling so well?

Imagine how many more GM would sell with better drivetrains. We've got to accept people's criticisms and address them to be the best, can't afford anymore mistakes.

[vanshmack]

Originally Posted by megeebee

If it's such a bad vehicle, and its creators such "idiots", why is it selling so well?

.

We're not saying it's a bad vehicle at all. We're saying the engine choices SUCK.

[mbukukanyau]

Originally Posted by megeebee

If it's such a bad vehicle, and its creators such "idiots", why is it selling so well?

.

Exactly. The Vehicle is selling well. People are doaling out dollars for this vehicle.
Yes, GM needs year to year improvements, but they are off to an exellent start...

Its a freaking Cadillac. Who goes to a Cadillac dealership looking for MPG? Or Lexus or Mercedes or BMW for that matter? Duh!!

[neshapop]

Wasn't just easier to put 3.6L SIDI as standard engine and call it a day? Why GM is trying to shove this 3.0L in every new premium/luxury product without any advantage to end users?

[toxictaz]

Looks Like Upscale Saturn Vue To Me Caddy Is Lookin Like Other Brands This Make Should Go In Another Direction If Its Going To Last Same Nose On Every Caddy Starting To Get Old!

[mbukukanyau]

Originally Posted by toxictaz

Looks Like Upscale Saturn Vue To Me Caddy Is Lookin Like Other Brands This Make Should Go In Another Direction If Its Going To Last Same Nose On Every Caddy Starting To Get Old!

Mercedes has had the same nose for close to a century. Did u say it was old?