I know that downsized it to make room for the Lambda Escalade, which would leave many scratching their heads if the current SRX continued on the Sigma platform, which is dying, isn't it?

 

It is about the same as the last SRX

2009 SRX V6 AWD = 4320 lbs.
2009 SRX V8 AWD = 4,442 lbs.

2010 SRX V6 AWD = 4307 lbs. (although one GM site says 4224lbs.)

2010 Lexus RX350 V6 AWD = 4,510 lbs.

Audi Q7 V6 AWD = 5,170 lbs.

So the new SRX is lighter than the main competition the Lexus RX350 and size wise it is 4" shorter and 3" wider than the old SRX. So it is easy to see why the weight is about the same.

Looks like SRX is the lightest crossover in that segment.

 

Well, yeah. The old SRX was larger, had an available 3rd row (cramped or not), was based on a RWD architecture, and still was lighter than the new one.

 

The CTS wagon will take car of all 8 or 9 people that bought an old SRX.

 

Did you read the part of the article that was quoted out?

In actual testing it seems the curb weight is noticeably higher than GM's claims (which often happens).

 

You're probably right. The new SRX more closely competes with Lexus RX than the old one. Like every other GM product from now on though - it needs to be best in class, no excuses. I'm not sure if the new SRX will deliver there.

 

Yeah, based on manufacturers numbers they are wrong. Even it they put their SRX on a scale with a full tank of gas it is still lighter than what Lexus says the RX350 weights and Audi says the Q7 weighs.

The old SRX is a few pounds heavier according to GM. Also the new one isn't really that much smaller. Interior volume is 132 cu ft and the new SRX is 129.8 cu ft. So while there is no 3rd row there is almost as much interior space (-2 cu.ft.)

We are all very pro-RWD on this site, but the RX and Q7 buyers don't mind. Plus most sold will be AWD, at least here in the North East I'd expect 90%+ to be AWD. It is crazy to spend that kind of money and not get AWD. Escalade on the other hand is a different story.

 

While I like the SRX, I am reminded of what my dad said when he first test drove a then-new 3rd gen: they forgot to put an engine in it.

 

I'm not sure about the Lexus, but the Q7 comes with a third row. That's a big difference/advantage.

 

Looks like a turbo version as well...available in October 2009
35 hp and 72 pound-feet of torque increase over 3.0 engine



http://blogs.thecarconnection.com/ma...llac-srx-turbo

 

Has the new 3.0 received even one good review??

Every single review has been very poor, on this engine. Every one says it is sluggish, and gets poor fuel economy.

Which begs the question, why is this engine in a Cadillac???

 

+35hp out of a turbocharger???

Did they forget to bolt it on?

 

I thought the same...it drops .2 liters though? Big jump in tq thoguh

 

Audi Q7 is not a competitor to the '10 SRX.

Q5 is.