2013 Cadillac SRX Performance Collection

Great write up mud, Love the style of the SRX but have to admit that after test driving the car myself. There are two deal breakers for me, all 6'6" tall of me.

Once I am set in the front seat, the back seat has NO leg Room or Head room. No one can sit behind me.

Two is the metal trim on the dash, it reflects badly on the front glass on a sunny day and is very distracting.

I wonder if the performance package has stiffer seats as I thought the seats were very comfy but firm. This would explain the cement wrapped in leather feel you got.

I don't get this truck. It's neither sporty nor comfortable. If I wanted something plush and spacious, I'd get an RX450h, and if I wanted good driving dynamics, I'd get an X3 or Q5.

And 16 MPG city is inexcusable for an errand runner like this. The BMW and Audi have 25% better fuel economy around town, while the Lexus hybrid beats it by 85% (though more like 50% in the real world).

This car needs the 3.6 Bi-turbo more than the CTS does. It is afterall the heavier car.

Nice ride but showing its age. The new one will address the weight and the issues of size as this one is pretty large for this segment. It also may have a lot of back seat room but at the expense of the rear cargo area. It will be interesting to see how GM updates this segment.

While the Caddy is nice the GMC is a better deal unless you catch a break on the SRX that they do once in a while.

The MPG is expected as you have well over two tons here to move. The 3.6 has improved the MPG too. The TT V6 would have the ability to get a little better MPG but also provide worse the way many driver drive with this amount of weight. The TT would be better suited for a 3500 SRX vs. this one.

I wonder if the performance package has stiffer seats as I thought the seats were very comfy but firm. This would explain the cement wrapped in leather feel you got.

I'm highly doubting it.. I've talked to a couple other people who drove the SRX as well and they have the same complaint.

I don't get this truck. It's neither sporty nor comfortable. If I wanted something plush and spacious, I'd get an RX450h, and if I wanted good driving dynamics, I'd get an X3 or Q5.

And 16 MPG city is inexcusable for an errand runner like this. The BMW and Audi have 25% better fuel economy around town, while the Lexus hybrid beats it by 85% (though more like 50% in the real world).

RX 450h is on my list of vehicles to get in.

I don't get this truck. It's neither sporty nor comfortable. If I wanted something plush and spacious, I'd get an RX450h, and if I wanted good driving dynamics, I'd get an X3 or Q5.

And 16 MPG city is inexcusable for an errand runner like this. The BMW and Audi have 25% better fuel economy around town, while the Lexus hybrid beats it by 85% (though more like 50% in the real world).

While the numbers might say the audi and bmw are better, real world shows they are equal to the SRX. I work with a number of people who have all 3 of these CUV's and they are not seeing better gas mileage compared to the SRX.

The Seats are subjective.

I see the same comments on the Terrain. Most like the seats but some complain they are hard.

In the last year I am ok with them. I am use to stiff seats in most of the cars I have owned as most have had performance seats. Now if you were coming from a DTS or the like you may no like these.

The younger you are the more inclined you will be to feel they are fine.

I don't get this truck. It's neither sporty nor comfortable. If I wanted something plush and spacious, I'd get an RX450h, and if I wanted good driving dynamics, I'd get an X3 or Q5.

And 16 MPG city is inexcusable for an errand runner like this. The BMW and Audi have 25% better fuel economy around town, while the Lexus hybrid beats it by 85% (though more like 50% in the real world).

While the numbers might say the audi and bmw are better, real world shows they are equal to the SRX. I work with a number of people who have all 3 of these CUV's and they are not seeing better gas mileage compared to the SRX.

The numbers say the audi and bmw are better, real world shows they are better than the SRX. I work with a number of people who have all 3 of these CUV's and they are all seeing better gas mileage compared to the SRX.

Had the 2012 SRX Performance FWD version of this car on vacation in Georgia last September, and we loved it.

Definitely smaller by design than mom's Terrain, but a more performance edge and quieter ride as well. Different ambiance with the interior and panoramic roof. We enjoyed it and the 3.6L was nice, my main complaint was the rubber band feeling 6-spd FWD transmission. Combination of the 3.6L wanting to rev and the transmission feeling tuned/set up to "waaaaaaaa...." then slowly shift. Similar to almost all transverse GM 6-speeds with the V6, though mom's new 3.6L AWD Terrain seemed sharper to me.

Great car. Not necessarily the RWD based engineering marvel magazines loved like the last one, but this one real people actually buy and enjoy, and repeat buy again.

Now if they'd only get rid of those terrible looking silver painted base 18" wheels that for 4 years have remained and look worse and department store hubcaps...

My experiences with the SRX have been initial disappointment followed by a quick warm up and appriciation for it.

GM needs to move a lot of their vehicles to a new universal platform to replace all these thetas and epsilons.

Regals, Malibus, and many other epsilons have had size issues in different dimensions, and weight issues. None of the Vues (cmon this is a fatter Vue) Captivas, Equinox, SRX have been light or optimally packaged.

GM could likely move a dozen or more vehicles in a new properly sized and lighter platform in the future and this is one of them.

In the meantime, they have made pretty well with what they have. A biturbo would be perfect for this.

Hopefully the next SRX looks less squashed and more sleek, has more room, and is about 500 pounds lighter.

I'm hoping the next SRX is on Alpha... not because I favor RWD over FWD (clearly I don't, and I don't feel it is a requirement for this segment), but because of lightness and advancement and flexibility in that platform.

I believe that once GM moves the bulk of their auto's to a new Universal Plug and Play frame, body and engine design, they can lower cost, increase profits and reduce weight to increase MPG and performance.

I'm hoping the next SRX is on Alpha... not because I favor RWD over FWD (clearly I don't, and I don't feel it is a requirement for this segment), but because of lightness and advancement and flexibility in that platform.

as well as economies of scale in Alpha components, giving Cadillac extra exclusivity compared to the other GM offerings, and (forgive me for the teenager side resurfacing up at age 36), because Alpha is such a kick ass development in the way GM approached platform development!

A Cadillac BRX and a Cadillac SRX (I think the names should not be connected to the sedan/coupe/wagon names), respectively on SWB and LWB Alpha, would be perfect in the rounding up of Cadiilac's portfolio. IMHO...