I reat the article in the new C&D about the SRX today and the last quote of the article was "...it feels expensive." The only thing they were negative about was it felt too SUV-ish at low speeds around town.

This is the first GM that I dont remember any rag really ripping into in a long time (C5 aside). Even the CTS was ripped as being underpowered. Maybe Caddy can compete head to head with the likes of BMW and its European friends. Anyone else really excited about what Caddy is doing right now?

 

Cadillac is the one brand, not just at GM, but of ANY car division that's on a roll.

The CTS has gotten rave reviews (I don't understand why it was viewed as underpowered, it's about as quick as vehicles considered performance cars not more than 5 years ago), the XLR, though a rebodied higher priced C6, also seems a potential winner, the Escalade not only is winning over youth with too much money for their own good as well as traditional Cadillac buyers, but will soon be the 1st V12 powered SUV, the upcomming STS looks like it's going to be awsome as well (and the top candidate for the 1st American V12 car in about 60 years, and the future doesn't stop there.

Nissan/Infinity are on a hot performance roll right now, but Cadillac is where the REAL excitement is. Everything else pales next to those 2.

BTW, what exactly did they expect Cadillac's SUV to feel like if not SUV-ish?

Some people are such rocks.

 

Cadillac is making some of the most exciting moves in the industry, IMO!

My only concern is that Mr. Lutz may be trying to 'soften' the Arts & Sciences look... While I like the idea (and especially the engine) of the Cadillac Sixteen concept, the lines do not have the 'edginess' of the other Arts & Science cars and concepts (CTS, SRX, XLR/Evoq, Cien)...

Other than that, though, I have no complaints whatsoever about Cadillac, and what they are showing actually has me very interesting in a brand that I had no interest in at all over the 30 years of my life!

 

Just wait until the first comparison tests for the ripping to begin. GM vehicles, like other non-BMW cars, are greeted "generously" just after the product launch junkets. (Even car writers appreciate free drinks!) Then the new-car halo wears off. Typically, GM products end up last - or next-to-last if Ford products are involved in the test.

 

Hmm.. why is it that GMNA's most expensive most exclusive division is the one getting all the glory and all the praise and all the unexpected sales booms? Could it be because they're not making jellybean bubblecars? Just something to think about.

Thinking back to when the downward spiral in car design gained momentum in the early 90s, in retrospect I'd have to say that today's so-called "arts and science" theme is light years closer to where I was hoping (back then) cars would be today. i.e. with some technological character.. with some dang. And yes, with ANGLES and SQUARES, God forbid. In a sense, their stated goal of being "the world standard" is being pursued and executed pretty damn successfully, if you ask me. At least for today. No telling 5 years from now.

It's like we're consistently being told that if we want a sharp (no pun intended) looking car (example. CTS) we gotta pay a hefty premium, and everything else is down the hierarchy from that; the less you want to pay, the more pronounced its built in happy-face bumper and sky-high ***-end will be and the uglier and more counterintuitive the bubblecar you're stuck with and the more it looks like a mini-minivan. WTF? That phenomenon wasn't always like that.. it's a 90s-00s thing, and I hope it's over soon. How about instead of chasing the imports, force them to follow.

 

Hey at least C&D has something good to say about something from GM. I watched their scalding review of the Ion on C&D TV today...woah boy...GM should be downright embarrassed to release such an awful product. That interior is easily GM's worst.

 

I can't believe anyone would green-light that dorky dash with the IP dead-nuts in the centre. On a related note, C/D placed the Saturn LS 10th out of 10 in a comparison test the month before. That placement was behind a Kia.

As to the SRX, every review I've read so far is positive. They even seem to be overlooking the (borrowed from) CTS dash, which suffered much derision when the CTS came out.

My only question is, since they are already fitting the Northstar V8 to a modified Sigma chassis, why are they stuffing the old-tech LS1 into the CTSv? Afraid of upstaging the STSv?

 

Is the SRX the wagganish looking crossover? If it's the model i have in mind, the styling leaves a little to be desired.

Does anyone have pictures?

 

Yea its the one you're thinking about. Here's a of it.picture

Im not too much for the whole genra of what it falls into, but the competition for this thing style wise isnt very stiff. I'd definitely take it over what else is on the market.

 

Thanks for the pic chuck.

Reminds of the Vibe or the Azteck's Buick twin. Am i alone on this?

 

Vibe, Aztek or Rendezvous? Noooo...not even close. This SRX looks great. However....where are the rear shots? I keep seeing the front, and that's it.

I also picked up the latest Road & Track (usually an awful read) but they actually had all positive things to say about the SRX as well. But like redzed said, wait until the comparison articles come out and the "mighty BMW" BS starts getting thrown everywhere.

-Rich

 

I wouldn't call the LS6 "old tech". The cam in block design has proven to be more efficient in fuel consumption, manufacture cost, and pretty much everything else except the high RPM operation of smaller displacement engines and those with fewer cylinders, where OHC designs are better.

The CTSv was supposed to have a blown V6, so the LS6 is actually a power upgrade. The LS6 has way more torque (as well as horsepower...405 vs 315) than the Northstar has, so the CTSv will be much quicker than it would have been with either the Northstar or the blown V6.

Cadillac and Bob Lutz did us a really big favor.

 

Good point guionM, I almost for got about the old engine planned for the CTSv. I believe it was going to be a turbo 3.2L or the new 3.6L with a turbo, around 330HP. The LS6 was a good move, this is probably the first time that GM decided to blow the competition out of the water, instead of just keeping up with them (333HP M3)

 

The biggest advantage that the LS6 has over the Northstar regarding the CTS, is not more power, not more torque, not even that it's far cheaper than the Northstar. No sir. The LS6 fits the CTS engine bay.....the Northstar does not.

 

We know that GM doesn't believe in turbocharging anymore and a supercharged V6 would've been LAME. The LS6 was the only way to go.