From the AutoExtremist:




GM. In the midst of re-energizing GM's product portfolio, the Krispy Kreme effect seems to have taken hold of GM's product development troops. Some of their key new entries are just too damn heavy, example No. 1 being the new Cadillac SRX, which weighs more than 4500 pounds. And that's in a more compact overall package with no V-8. That's a giant bowl of - Oreo ice cream drizzled in chocolate sauce - Not Good.

Publisher's Note: Some of our readers are taking great umbrage this morning with my description of the Cadillac SRX as being too heavy vis-a-vis the competition. Well, guess what, the Cadillac SRX and its competition are all too heavy. I blame the German manufacturers for starting this runaway weight "creep" in our cars and crossovers (or "mass" for all you engineer types). Mercedes-Benz, Audi, BMW and to a slightly lesser extent Porsche are all guilty of egregious weight gain, and it's screwing everything up. It's real simple, folks. The manufacturers are putting - and we're far too accepting of them doing it too - too much stuff in our cars. All this techno-wonder crap is just that - crap. Tell me the last time you actually used some of the endless "amenities" loaded up on your vehicle. (Oh, how we despise that tedious and overused word around here, by the way. Memo to copywriters, either come up with another word, or better yet just cease and desist from using "amenities" immediately. Please.) I wrote about this subject a few years ago when the Corvette Z06 made its debut at an actually lighter weight than a typical Porsche 911. At that moment in time the world as we knew it had changed forever and Hell had just frozen over. Let's get this straight, 4,000 pounds is not okay or acceptable for an "average" vehicle. It's flat-out unacceptable in my book. Weight is the enemy of all good things when it comes to actually enjoying driving, unless, of course, you stopped enjoying driving. In that case we just can't help you. Too much weight negatively affects handling, responsiveness, "feel," fuel economy, braking, performance, basically everything when it comes to the enjoyment of our vehicles. So don't tell me that 4,000+ pounds is "acceptable" for an SRX or any other allegedly "more compact" crossover. Because it isn't. Period. - PMD

 

Are we at the point of no return? Manufacturers argue that customers wouldn't be interested in bare-bones basic cars. Is that a myth or is there an element of truth there?

 

I agree about cars needing to lose weight, but the new SRX is lighter than the old one. It is lighter than a lot of the competition. It is also barely smaller than the old SRX. The 2010 is 4" shorter, but a few inches wider and only has 2 cuft. less interior space. It isn't like they went from Escalade to HHR sized.

As far as no 3rd row seat, I'm sure if customers complain enough they will put one in for 2011. GMC Terrain was rumored to be getting one and that is a smaller vehicle than the new SRX.

 

Actually, Cadillac has a fullboat, AWD, V8, 2009 SRX listed at 4442 pounds. So, less weight for a larger vehicle with a third row and V8.

 

Which is heavier than the 4307 pounds the equivalent AWD 2010 is said to weight.

http://jalopnik.com/5305355/2010-cad...srx-part-three

 

Tata Nanos for everyone.

Most people don't care about performance and want the techno gizmos. For the performance junkies it is a problem. For 95% of the people out there, it is going to take high gas prices to let this stuff go.

 

Most people don't care about weight. They care about fuel economy and 0-60. As long as those numbers meet their expectations then what the weight is is irrelevant to them.

 

I wonder if they've got their numbers mixed up. ~ 4300 is what I've seen for the FWD version. ~ 4500 for the AWD.

 

Let's put the blame where it belongs. Safety and chassis rigidity stuff make up a much larger portion of the weight gain than the electronic gadgets do.

 

Agreed, multiple airbags front, side, knee, etc...side impact survivability, body strength, more power, crumple zones, 20 inch rims and tires, all add more weight. I wonder how many people would rather be in a wreck in an 2002 Camaro or a 2010 Camaro? I'll gladly take that extra 600lbs when a truck is t-boning my drivers side door. As long as the new cars can hang with the old I don't mind the extra safety margin. People are just driving like idiots more and more every day.Hell the 20 inch tires and rims on the Camaro probably add about 80lb's over a 16inch tire rim combo.

 

Agreed.

 

Where does it end?

I mean you can argue that a 5000 pound car is safer than a 4000 pound car. And if a 5000 pound car is safer, a 6000 pound car is even safer.

But like Delorenzo says, it's about actually enjoying driving. And if you've stopped enjoying it.....

 

To me, the first component of safety is agility. We are quickly approaching a point where cars will be too heavy to provide the necessary agility to avoid accidents. Many of today's cars are already past that point.

I've driven a new Camaro and IMO it is not past that point. It handles better than my 4th gen does in spite of the extra weight. There are many other cars today that also meet my standards. However, the vast majority of new vehicles available today fail miserably to meet those standards.

 

This part here is exactly the point I bring up everytime the weight issue comes up:

You simply aren't going to get power & heated everything, rides as stable and solid as sitting in your living room, let alone the previously noted points of having a chassis capable of handling mega horsepower, 18 wheeler truck grade brakes and IRS without having serious weight.

As always, losing weight is simple....

.... decide what you're ready to give up.

The regular Dodge Charger SRT8 weighs about 4200 pounds.

The Dodge Charger SRT8 used for drifting weighs 3300 pounds.

Outside of gutting the interior and all the goodies and creature comfort, the drifting Charger has much smaller brakes and smaller rims which save more weight than the lexan windows and carbon fiber fenders and hood do.

Out of the 900 pounds of weight savings, one could easily shave 200 pounds (and maybe even 300 pounds) simply by reducing what is mentioned in the autoextremist article diplomatically as...stuff... and going with smaller brakes.

But then, who would buy it?

What would magazine articles say about the car?

How would it hold up when compared to other vehicles?

Going back to the Autoextremist rant against the Cadillac SRX, to be honest, Autoextremeist doesn't have to sell a single car, so (like all of us, including me) is free to rant about anything they want regardless as to if it actually sells or not. Many people (again including myself) try to keep in mind that the automobile market is HIGHLY competitive, and that you have to actually make a car that's better than the competition to sell.

Although the fact is that the Cadillac SRX is shocking in it's weight at 4505 pounds (I have the Sept 09 C&D magazine which has the test of it), the ignored fact is that the SRX's top competitor also weigh that much....The AWD Lexus RX weighs 4510.

Is the SRX to compete with the RX with fewer items?

Is it to compete with the RX offering less items for the money?

Is it to compete with the RX offering less braking?
Less refined (re: isolated) ride?
Less rigid chassis?
Less of everything?

For what?

Weight that 99% of the buying public (and 100% of the RX & SRX's market) doesn't care about anyway?

Does anyone with both oars in the water honestly believe that anyone going into a near luxury showroom buying an SUV or crossover that makes them feel secure and safe on the road (let alone feels like it could go through a brick wall), actually give a hoot about weight as long as it gets decent fuel economy and wows them with goodies they never knew they "had" to have?

To us, 4500 pounds is "Are-You-Frigging-Kidding-Me!" heavy. But we're a performance oriented group that knows the horsepower and all the specs of the cars we drive. And being here on this site, we're used to everyone thinking the same way.

Truth is that we are nothing but a sliver of the car buying public.

It's easy to forget that, and think that certain things and ideas (even demands) some of us may be religiously devoted to, doesn't even register as a blip to the 99% of the rest of the car buying public.

Fuel economy (next to competitors), value, how a vehicle feels to them, looks and personal desire are tops in their priority. Actual weight is probably at the very bottom of their consideration criteria..... and that's in the almost unherd of times it's on the list at all.

 

One other thing to think about though is that all of the gadgets and other content that adds heft to a vehicle also allows the manufactorer to charge more for it. I think that automakers have learned through this whole bankruptcy is that all vehicles must be profitable in their own right. They can't rely on heavy discounts to move the metal.

On a side note, having recently aquired a vehicle of heft, my eyes have been opened to the drawbacks of weight. 4300lbs is a lot of weight, even for a Hemi. I still like my LX, but it feels more like driving a low slung truck and less like my Trans Am.