Report: GM Discontinues Turbocharged Cadillac SRX
19
Cadillac has confirmed that it has discontinued the turbocharged variant of the SRX crossover. The up-level version of the crossover was powered by a 2.8 liter single-turbo V6 that made 300 horses/295 lb.-ft. of torque and carried the LP9 production code. The move leaves the (also uninspiring) 3.0 liter naturally-aspirated V6 (production code LF1) making 265 hp and 223 lb.-ft. of twist as the only engine available in the Theta-based crossover.
Cadillac spokesman Robyn Henderson confirmed that the decision to axe the turbocharged engine, which has been critiqued for unimpressive performance and a low fuel economy rating (15 mpg city, 22 mpg highway), was primarily due to low sales numbers. In fact, over 90 percent of SRX buyers opted for the 3.0L (LF1) engine.
Henderson also noted that the SRX is a leader in the luxury crossover segment, enjoying a larger market share than the BMW X3, Audi Q5 and the Mercedes-Benz GLK — though we would like to point out that it’s bigger and less expensive than every one of those vehicles.
The GM Authority Take
Let’s see what engine will replace the rather uninspiring 2.8 liter as the up-level powerplant in the SRX. If we were to guess, the upcoming 3.0 liter twin-turbo LF3 should be the perfect choice for the mid-sized luxury crossover. Agree? Sound off in the comments below.
Sounds like a nice motor ..Why not just turbocharge the 3.6 liter and call it a day. Should be able to put out 380 hp easy and worthy of the extra coin needed over the base 3.0 liter 265hp motor..
I’m a huge fan of the 3.6 liter DI motor. It puts out an easy 304hp and although the direct injection has been mentioned on the podcasts as loud from outside the vehicle..
As an owner this was never anything that bothered me.
The 3.6 DI is powerful enough and GM could just do away with the relatively lame 3.0 V6 base motor..
I agree – I’d like to see the 3.6 turbo charged as well, rather than the 3.0. But as far as we know, it’s the 3.0 LF1 that’s getting the turbo treatment:
http://gmauthority.com/blog/2010/08/gm-twin-turbo-engine-lf3/
http://gmauthority.com/blog/2010/03/gm-new-twin-turbo-3-0l-v6/
That said, the 3.6 is still too unrefined in my opinion. Compared to Toyota’s 3.5 and Nissan’s VQ35, it makes too many clicks and weird noises and vibrations that need to be eliminated before it gets turbo’ed.
Alex, the Direct injection of the GM powerplant is what gives it the ticks that some hear from outside the vehicle.
I have the 3.6 Direct Injection in the cadillac CTS with 304 hp and its a great powerplant. I don’t hear the ticks mentioned when driving it and how many times does one stand outside the vehicle with it running?
I’d much rather have 304 hp and direct injection tick noise if I had to over say a less powerful motor that didn’t get as good a gas mileage.
I personally think the SRX should have always just had the 3.6 DI and be done with it.
With the 304 hp DI 3.6 the SRX would accelerate to sixty miles an hour in the seven second range and thats more than enough …
Anything under 8.5 is acceptable for consumers of this market segment…or so its been said..
No reason to have any other engine in the SRX than the 3.6 304 hp motor..
The average SRX owner is really just looking for a “cool looking” CUV instead of their more practical Minivan alternative..
IMO
and for what its worth..the LS1, LS6 LS2, LS3 also tick! (and thats without direct injection)
My C5 Z06 with an aftermarket cam and dual valve springs had a ticking noise too.. (along with quite a few other sounds..ie cam lope, header noise and tick..it was a wild @ss ride)
All kidding aside…maybe the next generation of Direct injection motors from GM won’t tick ..I don’t know..
I do know from inside the vehicle..you don’t hear it at all but I do know what your talking about..
It sounds dissapointing when viewed from outside, to be sure GM killing a performance varient; but I’m sure there are not only cost concerns but quality controll concerns as well for such a low production option that do’snt cost all that much more.
Alex, is the Nissan QV6 new, I’ve read for ever and a day about how agrocultural it sounds and feels? Nissan heads take pride in it. Annyhow I’ve allways thought the VVT V6 in my 05 CTS soulded kind of sexy, more like an old Alpha Romeo than a Cessna or farm tractor, I’ve never heard the DI motor, I allways assumed that it soulded like my St Catherines VVT, but with a valve tap tic tic tic, that I assumed would make it come off even sexier, like a solid lifter racing mill. All a matter of opinion I suppose, hu?
…would rather have a mkx
I like how the 3.6 liter DI sounds and feels when I’m driving my 304hp CTS..! and its coming for 2012 in the SRX ..
Should be a nice matchup.
JMO
In addition to the new 2012 options/features revealed a few days ago, it seems there may be a new V6 engine in the future. Labeled the “LFX”, it seems to be a significant improvement on the already outstanding LLT V6.
The new engine option description is: “LFX 3.6L SIDI, DOHC, VVT, E85 MAX, Alum GM”
The LFX should displace 3.6L, like the current V6 found in the CTS. And it’s packed to the brim with advanced technologies like Spark-Ignition Direct-Injection, Dual Overhead Cams, Variable Valve Timing, and E85 capability!!
Those are the hard details…but a little research raises some other interesting points. It is likely that the LFX is going to build on the innovations of the 3.0L LF1 V6 found in vehicles like the Cadillac CTS, SRX, and Chevy Equinox. That engine features a composite intake manifold, integrated exhaust manifolds and optimized NVH/airflow treatments.
The LF1 produces 270hp in 3.0L form in the CTS. If we scale up the displacement of the 3.0L engine to 3.6L, estimates have the new LFX producing anywhere from 318-324 hp.
E85 capable is also a big win for GM’s government fuel economy targets.
I suggest thats the new SRx powerplant in 2012 as well as the camaro and CTS.
Well that’s mighty interesting. From what it sounds like the LFX is the LF1 scaled up to 3.6 liters — which is definitely great news!
And I was just thinking about this earlier today. If you look at most luxury brands, they all have some sort of a uniform V6 offering across the board! BMW has the 3.0, Lexus has the 3.5, Infiniti has the 3.5/3.7 VQ, Mercedes has the 3.5 as well. So Cadillac should have the same — a bread-and-butter 3.6 liter V6 that’s modern, powerful, refined, and fuel efficient — all at the same time!
That new V6 sounds interesting. 320hp no less! Thanks for the information.
Much better than that weak 3.0 liter v6 and complicated twin turbo engine that GM just killed!
I like the fact it is E85 capable. There will come a time that ethanol is cost effective from facilities like Coskata and E85 will be a way of life here in america.
Made from garbage, using one gallon of water at a cost of about a buck a gallon wholesale.
4 dollar a gallon fuel makes coskata a truly viable alternative.
The Madison Pa. facility was a test facility and there was a second full scale plant supposed to go up in …I believe tennessee..
I’m not sure if its still on track…as the oil companies are very cunning….as they dropped gasoline for about a year under 250 a gallon it nearly bankrupted all the ethanol startups where they were starved for cash…
I wonder which ethanol startups sold out to big oil a year ago and who is left without big oil companies in pulling the strings…(burying any competing technologies)
It will be interesting to find out.. and we will know soon enough …because if the startups such as coskata don’t announce production capability we know what happened…
Some may say this is free market at its finest..
I’m not sure what I will call it if coskata and startups like them all of sudden have decades of research and development to achieve before the product is marketable..
JMO and sorry for the rant off topic!
5.3 L works 6.2 L works why the delay?
@Thomas Which delay?
Caddy… Chevy div has lots of crate engines sitting around getting ‘dusty’
use it or loose it I say
For the SRX?
SRX 2 wheel
dont know about new body style, 2009 and earlier, just stuff a BIG engine
under the hood. 5.3 uses 87 oct 6.2 uses 92 or higher oct
What for? Those big a$$ push rods have no place in modern luxury cars, unless your goal is to “do it right” like Caddy did with the LSA. But that’s not befitting a luxury crossover at all.
Ever since the excellent 3.6 liter V6 LFX replaced the measly 3.0 liter LFW, the SRX has a very respectable 300 horsepower and 260 lb.-ft. of torque. I wouldn’t give a front-wheel drive non-so-performance-oriented crossover much more power than that…