Joined
·
594 Posts
New BRX to be actually named SRX
1 - 20 of 129 Posts
Joined
·
21,460 Posts
Whaaaa???
But...that doesn't fit in with the rest of Cadillac's naming scheme...
It's not based off the Seville (STS).
It should be the CRX or something.
Odd decision. I guess they just don't want to introduce a whole new nameplate.
But...that doesn't fit in with the rest of Cadillac's naming scheme...
It's not based off the Seville (STS).
It should be the CRX or something.
Odd decision. I guess they just don't want to introduce a whole new nameplate.
Joined
·
45,627 Posts
Thank goodness.
I was getting sick of calling the damn thing "CTX" cause I thought that was stooooopid.
SRX does have brand equity. It's been in the market for 5 years -- or at least will be by the time the Gen 2 SRX comes in. That also allows people who bought an SRX to "trade up" to a new SRX without feeling that they are "downgrading" to a "CTX" or "BRX" or whatever.
On the other hand.... it's not an RWD platform.... I'll lay down money it won't have nearly the performance of the Gen1 SRX.... and it will be eaten alive by the X5.
If SRX Gen 2 is meant to compete with the RX and MDX... then that's a mistake on Cadillac's part. There is no need for Cadillac to aim low.
All things considered... I'm happy SRX remains. Now Cadillac... a word about "DT7".... how about STS?
I was getting sick of calling the damn thing "CTX" cause I thought that was stooooopid.
SRX does have brand equity. It's been in the market for 5 years -- or at least will be by the time the Gen 2 SRX comes in. That also allows people who bought an SRX to "trade up" to a new SRX without feeling that they are "downgrading" to a "CTX" or "BRX" or whatever.
On the other hand.... it's not an RWD platform.... I'll lay down money it won't have nearly the performance of the Gen1 SRX.... and it will be eaten alive by the X5.
If SRX Gen 2 is meant to compete with the RX and MDX... then that's a mistake on Cadillac's part. There is no need for Cadillac to aim low.
All things considered... I'm happy SRX remains. Now Cadillac... a word about "DT7".... how about STS?
Joined
·
36,517 Posts
Cadillac is really going where Buick should be going
Joined
·
7,975 Posts
I'll bet that the X5 eats the RX300 "alive" too, but which one is a better seller?
Being equal/worse/better than the X5 really has not helped the current SRX, the heart of this market is something that sits high, looks good, has luxury equipment and a designer badge, thats what the majority of luxury crossover buyers(i.e women with nice purses and expensive sunglasses) like.
Joined
·
45,627 Posts
And which one is a reconstituted family car... and which one is based on performance RWD?
If Cadillac is intent on being a sport performance luxury brand like BMW, then it's best they lay off the FWD platforms. It's best that they determine what is fundamentally wrong with their current cars and fix it, instead of retreating and trying a cheaper route.
They'll find that continual improvements will reap rewards. And it will build a solid reputation.
Joined
·
1,872 Posts
That's good news. I'm just not very comfortable with the idea of it being FWD now. It makes it an odd duck out of Cadillac's otherwise RWD lineup, and may affect how it competes with the BMW X5 and Mercedes ML-class in terms of performance. Maybe the AWD version could rectify that (but not 100% of course).
Joined
·
69 Posts
It's actually kind of smart to have FWD for this car. Unless it was going to be RWD with the ability to turn into 4 wheel drive, its useless in the north. You guys should see the amount of BMWs sliding all over the road to get up a small incline with half an inch of snow on the ground, it's hysterical. In order for the Cadillac resurrection to be successful, it needs to be popular in the big cities and their suburbs because that is where most of the money is concentrated in America. Cadillac's top targets are BosWash (big cities starting from boston and ending in DC) and LA. This is why the CTS is offered in RWD and AWD. It would have been nicer to see both of these on the new SRX, but with stupid CAFE and the cost of having two set ups probably forced GM to go FWD. It isn't a terrible thing though, look at the Lambda trio's success...
Joined
·
45,627 Posts
There was an SRX4 for sale too! So it did come in AWD.
X5's have full-time AWD with a RWD bias -- 68% of power goes to the rear wheels.
I guess SRX can be "programmed" to provide a RWD bias on a FWD platform.
Sigma is an awesome platform. Yes. It's pricier. But dammit... SRX is a premium luxury car. It ain't a Chevy!
Joined
·
5,411 Posts
GOOD!
I am glad that the SRX name is sticking around!
But if it ain't better than what the 1st gen SRX was, then Cadillac is dropping the ball again from the start. Just as they did w/no NAV. for the G8 upon its launch.
This kind of incompetence needs to stop.
I am glad that the SRX name is sticking around!But if it ain't better than what the 1st gen SRX was, then Cadillac is dropping the ball again from the start. Just as they did w/no NAV. for the G8 upon its launch.
This kind of incompetence needs to stop.
Joined
·
69 Posts
People won't not buy it because it's FWD. When they see the MPG sticker that says it does better than an X5, it'll be all over. I'll even go as far as saying that with the 3.6 DI motor that it won't be too far off from X5 perfomance.
Joined
·
45,627 Posts
Luxury car customers are not as price sensitive when it comes to gasoline. What they most care about is that the car is luxurious and has a strong image in the market. If the 2nd gen SRX will do that. Then good. Then the FWD platform won't really matter.
But if the FWD platform doesn't match the performance RWD Sigma architecture... and the high end SRX doesn't perform as well as the last SRX or at least keep up with X5... and if it doesn't have the necessary technology... or luxury amenities.... Then yes...SRX will have a problem.
What you'll essentially have is a tarted up, heavily modified Equinox with a Cadillac badge and a nice engine.
I own a Sigma I and as good as it is, it seems more spendy that it needed to be. I just drove the new Pontiac G8 for a three day weekend not more than a month after a weekend with the Sigma II CTS. The G8 was the GT also. In my opinion the G8 was BETTER in most all respects than my 2004 CTS-V and not a long way off the 2008 CTS. The 6.0L V8 in the G8 was WORLDS more refined and sophisticated than my LS6 CTS-V. Actually took the G8 too look at a 545i with my brother in law and that car didn't seem any smoother than the G8.
Anyhow, I am OK with this new ?RX. It will probably not be available in actual FWD unless they offer that just for the fuel economy reasons. And the AWD system will probably be pulled right from the SAAB 9-3 XWD. Everything I have read about that makes it sound almost preferable over RWD for an SUV. Really the biggest reason I think this could be a better vehicle than the current SRX is that the transverse engine just allow better packaging for a vehicle that is supposed to have lots of utility. Those more concerned with dyanmics AND utility will have the CTW. Only thing silly about this platform is that it seems just as heavy or actually heavier than Sigma for similar size as the new AWD Vue has smaller dimensions to SRX, but is about the same weight. Some of it is the AWD, but going to a transverse setup things should be getting lighter and not heavier even if AWD is standard. Maybe this premium one will be lighter I guess??
This isn't totally true. Many lux byers have a second car as a prius I am quite sure. Fuel economy isn't just about price sensitivety anymore. I don't think FWD will even be available on the Caddy or Saab versions of this vehicle anyhow. Also I think the platform will be pretty unique for these two vehicles compared to the Chevy or Saturn versions. Also I am not totally convinced performance is a Lux SUV buyers biggest concern either. Standard XWD would give it the wet and winter performance that is most important for an SUV anyhow. Really I think the softest performance spot when pairing it up against an X5 is the towing capacity. Not sure many with these vehicles ever even exploit that though?
Joined
·
5,535 Posts
Well this sounds good. I was actually expecting GM to do this. After all GM doesn't need any overlapping models. It's a good thing that the replacement for the Cadillac SRX won't be named BRX, after all the name SRX sounds better and just fits in my opinion as a luxury crossover name for Cadillac. I would really like to see more spy pictures of the 2010 Cadillac SRX crossover.
Joined
·
9,679 Posts
It shouldn't even exist in 2010 Cadillac. It may have worked in 1999 when every other Cadillac was FWD. Now every other Cadillac is RWD.
It's not full-sized, so why does it wear the S-segment nameplate? Then again, why does the STS? Why does the CTS wear a C-segment nameplate? DTS? Lack of planning, that's why. Catera became CTS, Seville became STS and Deville (which was de Ville) became DTS.
It's not full-sized, so why does it wear the S-segment nameplate? Then again, why does the STS? Why does the CTS wear a C-segment nameplate? DTS? Lack of planning, that's why. Catera became CTS, Seville became STS and Deville (which was de Ville) became DTS.
Joined
·
36,517 Posts
What killed the SRX is not the way it drives or feels.. Its far superior to any other vehicle in its class, even now, after all these years.
DESIGN killed it. It looks more like a pacifica than X5
Joined
·
2,032 Posts
You forgot about the FWD BLS for Europe only.
1 - 20 of 129 Posts
