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 Charles in Vail, Colorado:
Hi all,
I live in Vail, Colorado. For those not familiar with Vail, it’s a ski resort in the mountains. My dad was a ski school director, and I followed in his footsteps. I’ve lived and worked here in Vail since I was a young kid. Today, I am blessed to be married and have two beautiful kids. Recently, we were looking for our first new car. Throughout this journey, I realized that Cadillac should be ashamed to call the SRX a Cadillac. Here’s my story.
Since I’m out on the slopes all day (walking distance from home) and my wife uses the car during the day to take the kids to school and run errands, we only need one car for the family. After doing a little bit of research, we decided that a nice crossover is the way to go. Being a fan of Cadillacs since my father brought home a Fleetwood in 1995, we set out to look at Cadillac SUVs, and man were we disappointed. Where do I even begin?
Realizing that the Escalade is overkill for what we need, we turned to the SRX. Since we live in the mountains, our requirements were, in descending order, as follows:
- All-wheel drive traction for the snow/ice
- Decent amount of space for the family and for cargo
- Sharp handling for the curvy mountain roads and switchbacks
- Roof racks for ski and bike holders
Obviously, we also wanted something “nice” and “pretty”… but those came second to the three primary criteria. We drove our neighbors’ SRX for a few days and were ok with it. In fact, we were were looking at price and the nitty-gritty of financing/leasing the SRX when we started looking at the vehicles around us. What we saw all over Vail and the surrounding mountain towns weren’t SRXs, but BMWs, Mercedes, and Audis. Funny that I never really cared to look before, probably because we weren’t in the market for a new vehicle. But now that we were shopping for one, the cars that other people drove opened up my eyes and made me wonder why there were so many German cars being driven by people who live and vacation in the area.
So we went out to test drive some BMWs and Mercedes-Benz SUVs and were very impressed. We liked the X3, but it was a bit too small for us. So, we took the X5 for a spin. The dealer let us drive it around for three days just to see how we liked it in real life and outside the dealership. And let me tell you: the X5 is night and day compared to the SRX: it’s more nimble, handles in a way that the SRX just can’t even begin to match, has a great interior, and just feels “solid” compared to the Cadillac. It pains me to say it, but BMW makes better crossovers than Cadillac. If it weren’t for the extra space that we needed, we would have bought the X3 — which is like a smaller X5.
We bought the X5, and we love it, but one question lingered on my mind: why was the BMW such a better driver’s car than the Caddy? A few years ago, I kept seeing these Cadillac commercials about Caddy taking on and being better than BMW, but that was not our experience at all. That awoke the dormant car buff in me, I guess. I started doing research, trying to figure out how Cadillac could improve so that perhaps in the five years that our lease is up, we can buy a Cadillac. Old memories of my dad’s awesome Caddy still linger, I guess.
What I found is that the BMW X5 is pretty much a BMW 5 Series with a different body and higher ground clearance. What makes it such a great driver’s car is the way it is engineered. Now, I’m by no means an engineer, but here’s what I discovered during my informational journey, which is very much thanks to my friend, Ryan — an ex-aviation engineer:
- The BMW’s engine sits behind the front axle of the vehicle in a “longitudinal configuration”, which means the engine spans the length of the hood, from front to back, or north-south. By comparison, the Cadillac SRX has a “transverse configuration” in which the engine sits in front of the front axle in a left to right, or west-east, position.
- The BMW’s layout is more befitting a luxury car since it creates a better balanced vehicle. I imagine that this is what allows our X5 to be such a great-handling, agile, and nimble car in the Colorado mountains. I mean we love taking this thing around the twisties, which we couldn’t say about our previous two cars.
- The SRX, however, is the opposite: since its engine is in the very front of the car and way ahead of the front wheels, it is what engineers call “nose heavy”, meaning that the car is completely out of balance. This is because, as I discovered, the SRX is a version of the Chevy Equinox. When I discovered this, it astounded me, since that makes it a “fake” Cadillac, in many ways.
- Compounding this is how each vehicle “does” all-wheel drive. The BMW xDrive system starts with a “balanced platform” and then sends power to the rear wheels in normal driving conditions. When things get slippery or wet, xDrive re-adjusts as needed. But the nose-heavy Cadillac SRX starts life out as a front-wheel drive car, which further degrades its balance and driving ability.
The BMW crossovers, from the X1 through the X6, seem to be genuine luxury cars. This is also the case for the Mercedes-Benz GLK, ML, and GL crossovers. But the Cadillac SRX just seems to pretend its a luxury car with looks and features; but look under its skin, and you’ll see the flaws of its engineering — something that my wife and I instantly felt when driving the X3, X5 and SRX back-to-back.
What I find surprising, though, is that Cadillac isn’t oblivious to this. They made the ATS and CTS in the same way that BMW engineered its entire lineup: a longitudinally-mounted engine positioned behind the front wheels powering the rear wheels or all wheels when needed. So why doesn’t Cadillac do the same with the SRX?
Once I realized all this, it all started to make sense to me. And if it makes sense to me — someone who hasn’t driven or bought a new car in over a decade until now — then it is highly likely that it also apparent to those who buy cars on a regular basis. No wonder why there are so few SRXs in Vail and surrounding mountain areas, with BMW, Mercedes, and Audi popping up all over the place.
My suggestion: the people of Cadillac need to stop making warmed-over Chevy Equinoxes with a Cadillac logo. Instead, they should make a few “real Cadillac crossovers” to beat the BMW X1, X3, and X5 (apparently a large X7 is coming) in everything from driving dynamics to styling. Heck, they seem to have done it with the ATS and CTS sedan, right?
So as much I really, really want to justify spending $50k on a Cadillac crossover, I can’t bring myself to do so on the ill-balanced SRX.
Charles,
Thank you for the letter!
You have done your research well, because you are spot on.
Based on the Theta architecture, the SRX is a warmed-over Equinox/Terrain, but it can be so, so much more. Why Cadillac doesn’t use the award-winning Alpha platform, on which the ATS and CTS are based on, for a range of crossovers is beyond us.
In fact, GM Authority patron Jackson had a similar experience late last year. He bought himself a new CTS and wanted an SRX for his wife. Like you, they found that the SRX paled in comparison to the BMW crossovers, with them buying the X3 instead.
At this point, our only hope is that Cadillac, under the watchful eye of Johan de Nysschen, wakes up and uses the beloved Alpha and upcoming Omega architectures for CUVs of all sizes. Unfortunately, that’s not in the cards for the 2016 SRX (or 2016 XT5, as it will be called), which is expected to be all-new for the 2016 model year but continue using a front-wheel-drive platform (C1XX) shared with lesser vehicles from GM.
Comments
It should be a Buick, but the same sort of vehicle is good enough for Audi and Lexus. I am thinking GM will fix this problem with the XT5 and the Envision.
I agree that the SRX should be a Buick.
However, there are two distinctions about Audi and Lexus: the Lexus is pure garbage compared to the BMW and Benz crossovers because it is transverse engined and FWD and has no performance intentions what so ever. It’s as close to the SRX as it gets.
The Audi, by comparison, is longitudinally engined. Much better balance. Add in audi’s legendary Quattro and the Q5 and Q7 are very agile and sporty. Not as good as BMW and Benz, but close. Can’t say the same about Cadillac SRX or Lexus RX.
Audi uses a modified Haldex AWD system and calls it Quattro. Cadillac, including the SRX, uses an un-altered and pure version of the Haldez AWD that gives it two additional functions that were essentially removed from the Quattro, the first is being able transfer power in a criss-cross formation on the wheel (front right and back left, or front left and back right) to negate a potential spin, the second is the ability to transfer up to 90% of power to one particular wheel and a combination of the remaining 10% to the other wheels if you slide off a road or somehow get stuck and have one wheel with traction. So to give a short answer to this, Cadillac’s AWD system IS the MOST ADVANCED AWD system in any vehicle on the road as we speak, it outshine’s the Audi Quattro.
“Audi uses a modified Haldex AWD system and calls it Quattro”
This is only true for the A3, S3, Q3, and lesser models.
What you say above is not the case for the A4 and up, especially S4/RS4 (and higher) models with the quattro sport differential.
I think what Cadillac might need is a better awd system. We have a first gen and it’s great being rwd but we’re mostly scared to drive that vehicle out in snow despite living in the southwest where it rarely snows. Another problem is who think it’s the best idea to put blinkers on the bottom of the bumper area?
An AWD system can only do so much to solve what is otherwise an architectural problem, also known as the transverse-engined, front-wheel-drive platform on which the SRX rides on.
I honestly just think cadillac can’t get over the people who buys the RX
The Lexus was more the target than the BMW — and the product is at the end of its lifecycle — so a comparison with a X5 wouldn’t necessarily put the Cadillac in the best light.
However, there are aspects of the review that seem somewhat fabricated to me …… For example, the longitudally mounted engine …. yeah, you can do that with an I6 but a V6 allows you more flexibility in packaging, especially if you are starting from a FWD base — rightly or wrongly.
“The SRX, however, is the opposite: since its engine is in the very front of the car and way ahead of the front wheels, ”
Really? The rear wheels of the SRX are way behind the engine? Certainly not in any one that I have looked at.
Based upon comments like the above, I really wonder if Charles really did drive an SRX or formed his opinions from somewhere else — or the letter is fabricated for some reason.
Other aspects also aren’t ture. It isn’t uncommon for manufacturers to start with a basic architecture and make it different for their various brands. Cadillac isn’t any different than Ford/Lincoln, Toyota/Lexus, Honda/Accura, Nissan/Infinity, etc., in this regard — it isn’t the fact that they start from a common platform, it’s how they build on it that’s important. Had he compared a Terrain Denali V6 to an SRX and said that there wasn’t as much differentiation as he would expect, I would probably not question his claim.
Definitely something about his letter doesn’t ring genuine though
Actually, in all of the examples that you mention, the engine mounting points are the same regardless of what brand uses a platform.
Also, I don’t see what you don’t understand about the transverse engine issue. It is not the best setup for a luxury vehicle, V6 or I6. I drove the current SRX back to back with the last gen X5, and this was noticeable to me.
I don’t think there’s any arguing that the SRX is a nose heavy car and that its balance needs major improvement by moving it to alpha. After all, why not use an awesome platform to make an equally awesome crossover? That I completely agree with.
Elroy, I think you meant to say “front” wheels not rear here:
“Really? The rear wheels of the SRX are way behind the engine? Certainly not in any one that I have looked at.”
If that’s what you meant to say, then the guy who wrote the letter is right. The SRX’s engine is ahead of the front axle, which is what makes it such a poor driving car compared to BMW, Benz, Audi.
Didn’t the Old Cadillac have a Problem before withe re-badging, can someone say “Cimarron” !!! The problem is Cadillac seems to Never learn from Ill Fated Lessons, stop worrying about sharing your Great Platforms with Chevy and do you first to Perfection, that’s how a Luxury Company becomes a Truly Great Luxury Company and Cadillac can do this in it’s sleep if Untied……… 😉
Yupp. That’s why it’s so surprising that instead of using Alpha that underpins award-winning ATS and CTS, GM/Cadillac decided to use the new FWD-based C1XX platform for the next-gen SRX/Cadillac XT5. The same platform will be shared with the next-gen Traverse, Acadia, Enclave. The decision makes zero sense from any standpoint, whether it be business/financial, product/performance, or otherwise.
I think they just can’t get over the RX dude
But they need to. The RX is not the benchmark. The X3, X5, GLK and ML are.
If Cadillac truly wants to be the best (as continues to say in the speech below), then it needs to change its mindset about this key segment… and have done so yesterday.
http://gmauthority.com/blog/2015/02/read-cadillac-president-johan-de-nysshens-letter-to-cadillac-enthusiasts-and-skeptical-observers/
But if you look at the ML, it’s a whole different animal than X5. And that goes for the GLK with X3 too. And the similarity witH the ML is the same with SRX. ML shares the same platform with the JGC so you can pretty much say the ML can be a tarted up JGC. just saying.
Elroy has the right Idea.
He is correct the SRX is old and near death. It is one of the oldest models in a fast changing segment.
Second it was targeted at the Lexus and not BMW. It is what it is a FWD based CUV.
Third you have a car that sells a hell of a lot of models over the time and made a lot of money.
Fourth GM has opened the door to Cadillac since this model came out and they are targeting more than just Lexus. the next SRX may still be more Lexus eater material but there are other SUV models coming and they will be more targeted at BMW.
Charles to me did not do his home work as if he had he would not have bought the vehicle as many of his complaints were clear before he bought it.
To me Charles has buyers remorse because he did not do his home work or he would have never bought it in the first place.
How many here knew this was based on a extended Theta? I think most of us. How many here knew this was targeted at a FWD Lexus? Yes I see many more hands. How many here understand the AWD system is a very good Haldex. Hmm I see less hands but they do have a good system here but it too is aging.
Anyways Charles you need to spend less time complaining after the fact and do a little more research and learn what you are buying before you pull out your wallet.
The SRX is what it is and has served it purpose and will soon be replaced with a model more to the present market. I expect it to be moved away from the Chevy more. But on the other hand few people complain about the Chevy engine in the V series HMM?
scott, it appears that you have misunderstood what’s going on here. Charles bought the BMW. Not the SRX. Why would he have buyers remorse? He is happy with his X5.
Outside of that, nearly everything else that you say reeks of follower thinking.
Is the SRX old? Yes. Will the model that will replace it be better? Hopefully. Will it be competitive to the BM X3, Benz GLK or the BMW X5 and Benz ML Class? Not with the FWD C1XX platform, it won’t.
The fact of the matter is that the market has moved on. The RX was the benchmark of the segment in the 2000s. Hell, it single-handedly created the luxury CUV space back then. Props to Lexus for doing that. But the Lexus RX is no longer the benchmark; it’s actually behind in everything, from technology to the overall driving experience, to capability, quality, and everything in between. There is a reason the Lexus RS is not topping any studies: it’s not at the top of any owner satisfaction study, desirability, resale studies, or otherwise. Again, it is no longer the benchmark. BMW and Mercedes (and to a certain extent, Audi) have taken that crown and are running away with it).
As for Cadillac: it needs to reach higher than a front-wheel drive-based SRX/XT5 that’s not only poorly balanced, but also poorly proportioned (design-wise) because of its FWD platform.
I will leave you with this: if Cadillac truly wants to be the best (as it has stated time and time again), then it needs to aim higher than the plebeian, unexciting Lexus RX. It needs to become and then be the benchmark. And everything else, including accolades, sales, profit, and image will follow in due time.
Sorry My bad on owner ship here. It has been a long day and I scanned the story too fast.
But with that said there is no one at GM that would not expect the future product to supersede what they have now.
Chris give me one Cadillac prior to what is in the show room now that is good enough today? The SIgma CTS and V is not enough. The old DTS was not enough and why should we expect the SRX from the same era to be enough.
The fact is they should and will build a better SRX FWD AWD based Vehicle and it will make a lot of money. The key is they will also build an Alpha based model and possibly an Omega too.
We have to keep in mind Cadillac has gone from just making a better Chevy to a new animal where they will get their own models and their own enignes and that is still going to take a little more time.
This is why I warn people that the CT6 will be a very good car but it may not be fully what Cadillac is heading to yet and why there is talk of an even higher level car coming.
The game changed last year when GM Finally went all in. They went from Arguing with Mark Reuss on door handles costing too much on the CT6 to now letting them create their own drivetrains.
The fact is with the SRX is it will remain in the line up as a FWD CUE as it is the most popular and fastest growing segment out there. I do agree the next one needs to move to a higher level of being a true Cadillac but while Charles was not happy with this one they will also have what he is looking for coming too.
Like stated in the other thread the future volume of Cadillac will be build on the SUV and CUV models as the sedan is not a growth market any longer. It is a needed segment but not where the growth is.
the fact also that needs to be remembered is the RWD AWD SRX did not do much of anything. Be it styling size of quality it was a dud sales wise. I liked it but the sales tanked.
The 2013 Cadillac SRX has faulty design with the headlight system. The sealing product around the headlight assy dries out and causes the headlight to leak into the inside and short the bulbs or electric system to fail. I am having this problem right now (8/2022) with cost of $2274 to replace assy. GMC was aware of this problem with (2010-15 model) and has so far failed to help in the repair. There was Lawsuits in Calif and Fla previously and I was not informed of the problem before purchase. I will be seeking restitution if GMC fails to provide financial assistance here at Royal Cadillac in Tucson Az.
#1 – The SRX is NOT a direct competitor for the BMW X5. #2 The SRX is built on a FWD platform, not RWD like the BMW and Benz, so it will not perform the same dynamically, nor is it expected to. #3 – The SRX actually competes with the Lexus RX, Acura MDX, to name a couple. (both of which are FWD). Clearly, Charles, did some research, but he crossed shopped the SRX against non-direct competitors…only based on size, which doesn’t denote a ‘competitor.’ A Lincoln MK-Z is roughly the same size as a Cadillac CTS, but drive them both and see which performs the best…The Cadillac, as the Lincoln is FWD car that competes with a Lexus ES or Acura TL, not a CTS, which is RWD and competes with BMW 5 and MB E-Class. RWD vehicles inherently perform better than FWD vehicles due to the platform configuration and weight distribution. Thank you Charles for your opinion, but I’ve owned the SRX, two to be exact. Recommended them to both friends and family who bought them and our opinion totally counters yours…we all loved them and the resale value is amazing!
According to Edmunds. com the average transaction price for the SRX is $45K and the BMW is $58K. Duh! Edmunds.com gives the SRX a 4.8 out of 5 star rating.
Actually giving Charlie credit for exhaustive research isn’t fully justified. He also neglected to note that the estimated cost over five years of the SRX is $59K while the Bummer is a cool $85K.
Good luck Charlie!
Pretty straight.
Unless you’re looking at an entry-level model (E.g. Mercedes CLA, Audi A3, Lexus CT), the chassis underneath better not be a volume model derivative. This is why I place Cadillac above so-called ‘Luxury’ brands like Lincoln and Acura which just take Fords & Hondas and give them fancy lipstick.
The SRX is now the next car Cadillac really needs to work on. The basis should be one of an Front-engine/Rear-wheel-drive (FR) configuration then given a center differential AWD similar to the ATS & CTS. Cadillac has knack for building driver-focused vehicles as of late, so I have high hopes the next SRX (or SR3 or whatever the new nomenclature is) would exceed BMW’s floaty rides or even match Porsche’s Macan.
By GM having so many models in each division , utilizing common platforms appears to be a must to save money , big time . There is also a commonality in engines and drivetrains to a large degree . For Cadillac , to me anyways , it has the capability to build a comparable design to the top sellers , but choose instead to build vehicles that reflect its exclusive trendy designs and content….sell what they want the public to buy , not necessarily what the buyer is tuned into yet . This bold and inventive approach can be very effective if you have the big brand name and sales , but if you are playing catch up , this may just hinder your growth .
The SRX article shows how leaving a out of date model competing in today’s marketplace , can be ill thought . Sales are tanking , and another year to go before the new revision is made . …take a guess at how well it will look and drive and stimulate buyers to buy compared to the present X5 BMW , not to mention BMW’s next gen X5 ???
Playing catch up can be a bitch at the best of times , especially if you are more prone to throw out a bunch more models on the market , in common platforms , drivetrains and designs that don’t measure up to the top competitors !
Its a kinda too late conclusion, SRX is no more than a dressed up equinox with way worse suspension and very bad handling/comfort balance hugely shifted towards handling with complete ignorance of comfort ride. For a family crossover, you dont need such rigid suspension, with out much benefits in handling. Not X3 is better, Even X1 has better overall handling/comfort balance, because when they designed it, they thought of its primary use, which is entry level family cuv. In one sentence, SRX has nothing to do with Cadillac other than the badge!
I own a cad srx2014 bad headlights fog call dealer no complaints had local body shop repair paid cash now Cadillac won’t pay now have to get lawyer claim num. 1130104. 50 000 miles had to replace inst panel front axels battery now they gonna bet me out recall cause paid cash paul young phone 828 7779039