This article is part of the GM Authority Mailbag series, where the GM Authority Crew features and replies to your questions, comments, and observations.
The following comes to us from Jackson in Nashville, Tennessee:
With my youngest finally out of college, I decided it was time to get rid of my trusty Avalanche and get a luxury car. So after nearly a year of researching and test driving, I finally bought myself my first luxury car. A 2015 Cadillac CTS. It’s a fully-loaded Premium in the Phantom Grey Metallic with the 3.6 liter V6, and I couldn’t be happier with it.
Truth be told, I was a bit cautious, with all of my friends and neighbors tried to steer me away from Cadillac and into a BMW, Mercedes, Lexus or Audi. One acquaintance even works for one of those and offered to get me employee pricing on a comparable car to the CTS. But all of their efforts were feeble… after a 24-hour test drive of the CTS, I was sold. Sold beyond any doubt. A month later, I must say that I’m truly in love with this car through and through. I even nicknamed mine Milezilla for her ability to dispose of miles like nothing I’ve driven before.
So there I was with my new Caddy. Life couldn’t be better. But as I was backing my CTS into the garage two weeks ago, I thought to myself: wouldn’t it look so much better next to another Cadillac, instead of my wife’s trusty BMW X3? Sure, sure it would. And that was the start to my quest to get my wife into the SRX.
My wife is… lets just say she only drives crossovers and SUVs. Apparently she likes the higher driving position they provide. I don’t care for it that much but she sure does. So we went to the same dealership where I bought my CTS and got an SRX for an overnight (ok, over-the-weekend) test drive. And man were we disappointed.
The interior is nice but the car drives like a rental car. The first thing we noticed: it’s not nearly as sharp or agile as my CTS. Quite the opposite, really: it’s floaty and lethargic-feeling. My wife liked the acceleration, but hated everything else, especially how the SRX felt turning and going over bumps. She didn’t really like the knob-less controls either, but that came second to her being disappointed with the way it drove. We gave it back after the test drive and walked away in grave disappointment. She asked to drive my CTS back home that day and loved everything about it, except for the fact that it wasn’t a crossover (again, she wants the higher ride and the trunk space).
A few days later, I come home to see a brand new BMW X5 sitting in our driveway. Probably a friend, I thought. Then I walk in and my wife tells me that she borrowed it from the BMW dealership for a test drive. As a recent Cadillac convert, I have to admit that stung a bit. We went to the grocery store that evening in the X5 and all I could think of is how nice the X5 was to drive. The interior wasn’t as nice as in my CTS, but the thing drove like a crossover version of my CTS and was way better than the SRX, as much as I hate to admit it. She ended up buying a 2015 X3 since she didn’t need the X5’s additional room or features. I’ve been driving it this week while my wife is away on a trip and let me tell you, the X3 drives like a smaller X5. It’s probably how an ATS crossover would ride… if it existed.
The point of my long winded story is this: Cadillac seriously needs to step up its crossover game. Stop with the nose-heavy, front wheel drive Chevy derivatives (Equinox-SRX). Give us a crossover of the CTS instead. And give us crossover on the ATS too, while they’re at it.
Every time I drive my CTS, I keep thinking about how many new Cadillac believers I have created in my neighborhood since taking my CTS home with me. It’s an instant conversation starter. But every time I talk to someone who wants a crossover/SUV/CUV instead of a sedan or a coupe, I honestly can not recommend Cadillac because the SRX sucks so very much. And I don’t think the next generation that I’ve been reading about will be better since it sounds like it will be on an unbalanced front wheel drive-derived platform as well, just like the current one.
Cadillac, please do better… so then I don’t have to have a BMW parked next to my CTS… and you can sell more cars and crossovers. That said, thanks for making such an awesome car that is the CTS.
PS: my neighbor got an ATS Turbo on my recommendation and her husband drives a Mercedes SUV. Don’t think he’ll be looking at an SRX… not the way it is now.
Jackson,
Thanks for the letter!
First off, congrats on your CTS. It’s a beautiful car that’s also an amazing performer. What a great choice!
Regarding the matter of Caddy crossovers altogether: we completely agree with you. Let’s just say that the SRX leaves a lot to be desired when it comes to cornering, handling, and general driving dynamics. The problem is, as you alluded to in your letter, the way the SRX is set up: a transversely-positioned engine with front-wheel drive makes for a nose-heavy car with a messed-up weight distribution. Some will say it doesn’t matter when it comes to crossovers, but we truly believe that it does.
The proof lies in rising sales of the BMW X1, X3, X5, as well as the Mercedes-Benz GLK, ML, and GL — all of which are front-engined, and have rear-wheel drive-based all-wheel drive. And their engines sit longitudinally, instead of transversely — like it does in the SRX.
A vehicle that’s rear-drive and has a longitudinally-mounted engine is simply better-balanced — something that should be standard when it comes to luxury vehicles. Sure, there are some exceptions to that formula, like the Lexus RX and Acura MDX. But the Lexus and Acura (and even the SRX) are popular from a sales standpoint not because they’re respected, class-leading products, but rather because they deliver good value (features) for the money. In the case of all three, the value proposition is a mid-size crossover for the price of a compact German crossover. And with the more expensive German offerings outselling the Lexus and the Acura, the tide has officially turned.
So we’re right there with you in saying that Cadillac needs to make crossovers off the ATS, CTS, and upcoming CT6. BMW, Mercedes, Audi, and Infiniti do it… why not The Wreath as well?
Let’s hope Cadillac and Mr. de Nysschen are listening.
Comments
It is good to hear someone stepping out of the me-too crowd where the Joneses are being seen in BWM, Mercedes, Audi and Lexus which are a very common site, into a Cadillac and good to hear that the neighbors are intrigued of what Cadillac is offering and making them believers.
On the flip side, Cadillac does not have any SUVs for the trophy wife, except for the Escalade, and it is hard to disagree with many who does not want an SRX but they are coming in few years. By that time, I predict that many rwd crossover find many luxury homes parked in the garages.
I couldn’t agree more . Although I do own a 2013 SRX AWD , the body style is looking a bit ” long in the tooth ” as they say” . I do like the interior of it though , fits this 6’5″ frame really well . The fit and finish are better than some of the other Cadillac models I’ve seen . The only complaint I have is with the CUE system . I’m hoping that the next gen SRX has something better . But I am going to wait until the newbie is in its second year of production so GM can fix any bugs that may arise from the first year of its production .
Just get a real car. CUVs are ugly and pointless.. I thot she was no longer a soccer mom?
That’s not remotely the right reaction. The market for crossovers is exploding, and Cadillac can’t afford to miss out on it since it’s not only high in volume but also highly profitable. And today, BMW and Mercedes do them better because they base them on real platforms shared with the associated sedans.
The correct answer is Cadillac just needs to do a better job with crossovers and base them on the ATS, CTS, CT6, etc.
Jackson, you’re preaching to the choir here!!! The SRX definitely leaves a lot to be desired in the performance department. Goes to show that all this platform/powertrain sharing needs to cease with GM! Sure things may be better now than in previous years, but the fact remains that more product distinction is necessary to better set Cadillac apart! Or else, you’ll end up with a Cadillac that drives like a Chevy, which is what we have here!!!
To think Cadillac is refusing to leverage their world class Alpha platform for their next CUVs in favor of GM’s upcoming, corporate, FWD-based E2XX and D2XX platforms will insure their inferiority! Cadillac’s biggest marketing angle now is performance and luxury!! But since they’re going to go this route, the pricing had better not be insane!
Interesting, when the original SRX debuted it was a CTS based crossover and won rave reviews. Then against all logical sense GM insisted on making the SRX a FWD, platform stablemate of it’s other mediocre mid s-size crossovers…and enthusiast and loyalist the world over face palmed.
I will say your wife is a unique woman if she can discern and appreciate the difference in a true “driver’s machine” verses a plebeian, dressed up, blah mobile with a fancy badge on the front. Most of the SRX customers can’t and don’t care.
But my question is which level of SRX did they test drive? If it’s luxury collection then of course. But have they tested the performance or premium? Also first gen srx didn’t sell too well because it’s a bit too much of a cts or sts wagon. Also a bit of a archaic move of turning signals moving to the bumper area
Who cares what trim level it was, the current SRX drives at different levels of “poor” and “terrible” compared to the X3 and X5, GLK and M/ML. It’s the layout and platform of the vehicle that matters here, not the trim level.
You can’t fix the “wrong” platform choice with a trim level.
Even with FE3 suspension? I mean I kinda think that the current srx v8 that I have is a bit floaty on the street even with rwd and sport suspension
Yupp, even with the FE3 suspension. Even the best suspension can’t fix a car with an improper layout. In this case, the layout is transverse engine, FWD or FWD-based AWD.
I resemble this post. Wanted a CUV. After two last-gen SRX’s, and two current-gen SRX’s, needed something smaller with a better turning radius. Closest thing was an MKC, but it wasn’t available. Went with a Benz GLK350. Still feel guilty. But it’s an amazing vehicle.
Yeah, those Mercedes-Benz crossovers are truly great. I like the GLK and its bulky yet compact styling myself. It’s classic and timeless.