Jump to content
  • William Maley
    William Maley

    2013 Cadillac SRX Performance Collection

    Sign in to follow this  

    By William Maley

    Staff Writer - CheersandGears.com

    April 30, 2013

    The last time we reviewed a Cadillac SRX, it came with the choice of two different engines, an interior lifted from the Cadillac CTS, and coming close to being second in sales in the small luxury crossover arena. Fast forward two years and the SRX has undergone a bit of a change; there is now one engine, a revised exterior and interior, and coming very close to the Lexus RX in sales... (RX: 95,381 units. SRX: 57,485 units)

    A revisit it seemed was in order. That’s what happened a few weeks ago as a 2013 Cadillac SRX AWD Performance Collection was dropped off for a week’s evaluation.

    gallery_10485_648_146250.jpg

    The overall design of the 2013 Cadillac SRX hasn’t changed much since its introduction back in 2010. The model wears the ‘Art & Science’ design language very well with a number of sharp angles and creases throughout the shape. The only real changes for 2013 include a new front grille and side vents with new LED lighting.

    Inside the 2013 SRX, Cadillac revised the interior greatly with a new dashboard layout and instrument cluster from the smaller ATS sedan. Materials are in tip-top shape with a mix of leather, wood trim, and black acrylic for the touch capactive touch buttons. Build quality was excellent on this low mileage tester.

    gallery_10485_648_116206.jpg

    I had two disappointments with the SRX’s interior. One was the uncomfortable seats. Getting onto them for the first time, I felt like I was sitting on piece of concrete wrapped in leather. Not what I would call luxurious. The other problem was back seat room. While legroom is decent, headroom comes at cost thanks to a sloping roofline and the standard panoramic sunroof on the Performance Collection.

    Not disappointing is Cadillac’s CUE (Cadillac User Experience). Since we last tried CUE in a ATS back in December, Cadillac has issued an update to squash some of the bugs and improve the performance of the system. My test SRX came with the update and the system was noticeably smoother. Inputs on the screen and the capacitive touch buttons registered most of the time and moving around the system was snappy. Now Cadillac just needs to work on making the system somewhat less distracting.

    Powering the SRX is a 3.6L V6 engine with 308 horsepower and 265 pound-feet of torque. That is mated to six-speed automatic transmission to either the front-wheels or all four wheels. Compared to the outgoing 3.0L and 2.8L turbocharged V6 engines, the 3.6L sits in the middle. Low-end power isn’t the 3.6L’s strong suit, but get above 2,000 RPM and the power comes smoothly in. The six-speed automatic provided smooth shifts and didn’t need to downshift as much when I stepped on the accelerator, something that couldn’t be said of the 3.0L.

    gallery_10485_648_544538.jpg

    One place where I wished the 3.6L was better was fuel economy. The EPA rates the SRX 3.6L AWD at 16 City/24 Highway/18 Combined. During my week, I averaged 17.2 MPG in mostly suburban driving. Out on the highway, fuel economy rose to 24.2 MPG. Why the low MPG numbers? Part of the blame goes to AWD system in the SRX, but a good majority is to the 4,442 lb curb weight.

    Driving around in the SRX, my impressions were that Cadillac had focused more on the comfort than the sport. The FE2 suspension absorbs bumps and road imperfections with ease. A bit surprising since the SRX I was rolling in had twenty-inch wheels as standard equipment. Steering is very precise, despite the heavily boosted feeling I was getting. My biggest gripe dealt with the brake pedal. Whenever I put my foot on it to stop the SRX, it feels like I’m pushing through quicksand. This means you’re either not going slow down as fast as you like or come to a panic stop. Not pleasant at all.

    gallery_10485_648_1546234.jpg

    My test SRX AWD Performance Collection rings up at $49,085, which is a steal when you consider that includes CUE, a Bose surround sound system, keyless entry with push button start, twenty-inch wheels, blind spot monitoring, cross traffic alert, and a number other features as standard equipment.

    Its very easy to see why the 2013 Cadillac SRX is one of the best sellers in the segment. It offers the right blend of luxury, features, and value in a handsome package. While the SRX will not be coming anywhere close to toppling the Lexus RX in sales (so far in 2013, the RX current holds a 8,548 unit lead over the SRX), Cadillac should be very pleased that they have a very credible alternative.

    gallery_10485_648_876033.jpg

    Disclaimer: General Motors provided the vehicle, insurance, and one tank of gasoline.

    Year - 2013

    Make – Cadillac

    Model – SRX

    Trim – AWD Performance Collection

    Engine – 3.6L SIDI V6

    Driveline – All-Wheel Drive, Six-Speed Automatic

    Horsepower @ RPM – 308 @ 6,800 RPM

    Torque @ RPM – 265 @ 2,400 RPM

    Fuel Economy: City/Highway/Combined - 16/23/18

    Curb Weight – 4,442 lbs

    Location of Manufacture – Ramos Arizpe, CZ Mexico

    Base Price - $47,715.00

    As Tested Price - $49,085.00* (Includes $875.00 destination charge)

    Options:

    Black Ice Metallic Paint - $495.00

    William Maley is a staff writer for Cheers & Gears. He can be reached at william.maley@cheersandgears.com or you can follow him on twitter at @realmudmonster.

    Sign in to follow this  


    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments

    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.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    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).

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    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.

    Edited by hyperv6

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    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.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    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.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    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.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    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.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    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...

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

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

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    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.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    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.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    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.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    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.

    :yes: 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...

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites


    Join the conversation

    You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
    Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

    Guest
    Add a comment...

    ×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

      Only 75 emoji are allowed.

    ×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

    ×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

    ×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




  • Similar Content

    • By William Maley
      I’ve driven my fair share of Challengers on both extremes - from the standard V6 to the high-performance SRT and Hellcat models. But I never had any time behind the wheel of the R/T with its 5.7 V8. That changed in the summer when a bright orange Charger R/T Shaker was dropped off for a week. This allowed me to ask a question that has been sitting in my head for some time: Is the R/T the best bang for your buck in the Challenger family?
      The Shaker sets itself apart from other Challenger models with the use of a ‘Shaker’ scoop that prominently pops up from the hood. There is also a blackout treatment on several trim pieces and wheels that make it look even more imposing on the road. Along with the scoop, the Shaker package does add a new cold-air intake seated right in front of the driver’s side corner. This addition should boost the output of the 5.7L HEMI V8 (372 horsepower and 400 pound-feet of torque when paired with the eight-speed automatic. But FCA’s spec sheet doesn’t say anything about the Shaker Package adding more oomph or not. When you first start up the R/T Shaker, it makes presence known with a deep and loud exhaust note. I had to do a double-take the first time as I was wondering if I was given either an R/T Scat Pack or a Hellcat by mistake. While it may lack the high power numbers of the 6.4 and supercharged 6.2 V8s, the 5.7 is no slouch. 60 mph comes in at just over five seconds and power is seemingly available at any speed. My tester came with the optional Performance Handling Group that adds upgraded springs, sway bars, and a set of Bilstein shocks. This does improve the handling by a fair amount with less body roll. But it doesn’t feel nimble due to a curb weight of around 4,158 pounds. The steering has a quick response, but there is a noticeable lack of road feedback. If you want your muscle car to have some handling, consider the Camaro or Mustang. Nothing new to report on the Challenger’s interior. It still has the angled center stack, retro-inspired gauges, and easy to use UConnect infotainment system. The seats are where the Challenger loses some points as it feels like you’re sitting on top of cinderblocks. The Shaker package is surprisingly good value, adding $2,500 to the base price of the R/T which begins at $34,295. But you’ll need to be careful on the option sheet, or you’ll end up with something quite expensive. My tester came with an as-tested price of $46,555, which is $300 more than an R/T Scat Pack Widebody with the 6.4 HEMI V8.  The Dodge Challenger is getting up there in age and sadly cannot compete with the likes of the Camaro and Mustang in terms of handling. But Dodge is still able to offer a lot of performance in the form of the R/T. With a potent V8 engine, old school styling, and different packages like the Shaker to make your Challenger stand out, the R/T is possibly the best value and well-rounded model in the lineup. Disclaimer: Dodge Provided the Challenger, Insurance, and One Tank of Gas
      Year: 2019
      Make: Dodge
      Model: Challenger
      Trim: R/T
      Engine: 5.7 HEMI VVT V8 Engine
      Driveline: Eight-Speed Automatic, Rear-Wheel Drive
      Horsepower @ RPM: 372 @ 5,200
      Torque @ RPM: 400 @ 4,400
      Fuel Economy: City/Highway/Combined - 16/25/19
      Curb Weight: 4,158 lbs
      Location of Manufacture: Brampton, Ontario
      Base Price: $34,295
      As Tested Price: $46,555 (Includes $1,495.00 Destination Charge)
      Options:
      "Shaker" Package - $2,500.00
      TorqueFlite Eight-Speed Automatic Transmission - $1,595.00
      Performance Handling Group - $1,495.00
      Driver Convenience Group - $1,295.00
      Power Sunroof - $1,295.00
      UConnect 4C Nav with 8.4-inch Display - $1,095.00
      Alpine Sound Group with Subwoofer - $995.00
      Shakedown Graphics - $495.00

      View full article
    • By William Maley
      I’ve driven my fair share of Challengers on both extremes - from the standard V6 to the high-performance SRT and Hellcat models. But I never had any time behind the wheel of the R/T with its 5.7 V8. That changed in the summer when a bright orange Charger R/T Shaker was dropped off for a week. This allowed me to ask a question that has been sitting in my head for some time: Is the R/T the best bang for your buck in the Challenger family?
      The Shaker sets itself apart from other Challenger models with the use of a ‘Shaker’ scoop that prominently pops up from the hood. There is also a blackout treatment on several trim pieces and wheels that make it look even more imposing on the road. Along with the scoop, the Shaker package does add a new cold-air intake seated right in front of the driver’s side corner. This addition should boost the output of the 5.7L HEMI V8 (372 horsepower and 400 pound-feet of torque when paired with the eight-speed automatic. But FCA’s spec sheet doesn’t say anything about the Shaker Package adding more oomph or not. When you first start up the R/T Shaker, it makes presence known with a deep and loud exhaust note. I had to do a double-take the first time as I was wondering if I was given either an R/T Scat Pack or a Hellcat by mistake. While it may lack the high power numbers of the 6.4 and supercharged 6.2 V8s, the 5.7 is no slouch. 60 mph comes in at just over five seconds and power is seemingly available at any speed. My tester came with the optional Performance Handling Group that adds upgraded springs, sway bars, and a set of Bilstein shocks. This does improve the handling by a fair amount with less body roll. But it doesn’t feel nimble due to a curb weight of around 4,158 pounds. The steering has a quick response, but there is a noticeable lack of road feedback. If you want your muscle car to have some handling, consider the Camaro or Mustang. Nothing new to report on the Challenger’s interior. It still has the angled center stack, retro-inspired gauges, and easy to use UConnect infotainment system. The seats are where the Challenger loses some points as it feels like you’re sitting on top of cinderblocks. The Shaker package is surprisingly good value, adding $2,500 to the base price of the R/T which begins at $34,295. But you’ll need to be careful on the option sheet, or you’ll end up with something quite expensive. My tester came with an as-tested price of $46,555, which is $300 more than an R/T Scat Pack Widebody with the 6.4 HEMI V8.  The Dodge Challenger is getting up there in age and sadly cannot compete with the likes of the Camaro and Mustang in terms of handling. But Dodge is still able to offer a lot of performance in the form of the R/T. With a potent V8 engine, old school styling, and different packages like the Shaker to make your Challenger stand out, the R/T is possibly the best value and well-rounded model in the lineup. Disclaimer: Dodge Provided the Challenger, Insurance, and One Tank of Gas
      Year: 2019
      Make: Dodge
      Model: Challenger
      Trim: R/T
      Engine: 5.7 HEMI VVT V8 Engine
      Driveline: Eight-Speed Automatic, Rear-Wheel Drive
      Horsepower @ RPM: 372 @ 5,200
      Torque @ RPM: 400 @ 4,400
      Fuel Economy: City/Highway/Combined - 16/25/19
      Curb Weight: 4,158 lbs
      Location of Manufacture: Brampton, Ontario
      Base Price: $34,295
      As Tested Price: $46,555 (Includes $1,495.00 Destination Charge)
      Options:
      "Shaker" Package - $2,500.00
      TorqueFlite Eight-Speed Automatic Transmission - $1,595.00
      Performance Handling Group - $1,495.00
      Driver Convenience Group - $1,295.00
      Power Sunroof - $1,295.00
      UConnect 4C Nav with 8.4-inch Display - $1,095.00
      Alpine Sound Group with Subwoofer - $995.00
      Shakedown Graphics - $495.00
    • By Drew Dowdell
      QUARTER 4 (CALENDAR YEAR-TO-DATE) JANUARY - DECEMBER   2019 2018 %Change Volume   2019 2018 %Change Volume   Cascada 77 743 -89.6   2,535 4,136 -38.7   Enclave 10,143 14,420 -29.7   51,156 49,647 3.0   Encore 28,497 23,326 22.2   102,402 93,073 10.0   Envision 8,380 7,535 11.2   33,229 30,152 10.2   LaCrosse 463 2,118 -78.1   7,241 15,527 -53.4   Regal 1,514 3,110 -51.3   10,363 14,118 -26.6   Buick Total 49,074 51,257 -4.3   206,929 206,863 0.0   ATS 83 831 -90.0   1,134 10,859 -89.6   CT5 43 0 ***.*   43 0 ***.*   CT6 2,276 2,398 -5.1   7,951 9,668 -17.8   CTS 966 2,442 -60.4   6,965 11,219 -37.9   Escalade 8,889 9,573 -7.1   35,424 36,872 -3.9   XT4 8,895 7,573 17.5   31,987 7,785 310.9   XT5 11,168 13,582 -17.8   49,879 60,565 -17.6   XT6 7,169 0 ***.*   11,559 0 ***.*   XTS 1,062 5,063 -79.0   11,304 17,727 -36.2   Cadillac Total 40,551 41,462 -2.2   156,246 154,702 1.0   Blazer 23,008 27 ***.*   58,115 27 ***.*   Bolt EV 3,307 6,212 -46.8   16,418 18,019 -8.9   Camaro 11,474 11,135 3.0   48,265 50,963 -5.3   Colorado 25,484 30,004 -15.1   122,304 134,842 -9.3   Corvette 3,491 3,910 -10.7   17,988 18,791 -4.3   Cruze 2,699 32,955 -91.8   47,975 142,617 -66.4   Equinox 92,092 98,239 -6.3   346,048 332,618 4.0   Express 16,652 22,543 -26.1   77,457 81,239 -4.7   Impala 9,545 12,604 -24.3   44,978 56,556 -20.5   LCF 1,273 940 35.4   4,495 2,810 60.0   Malibu 34,314 37,084 -7.5   131,917 144,542 -8.7   Silverado HD 36,704 34,222 7.3   131,953 142,632 -7.5   Silverado LD 124,619 126,950 -1.8   438,686 442,943 -1.0   Silverado MD 2,018 6 ***.*   4,961 6 ***.*   Sonic 3,339 2,765 20.8   13,971 20,613 -32.2   Spark 11,016 5,174 112.9   31,281 23,602 32.5   Suburban 10,242 15,200 -32.6   51,928 60,633 -14.4   Tahoe 21,086 24,679 -14.6   101,189 104,153 -2.8   Traverse 33,631 39,536 -14.9   147,122 146,534 0.4   Trax 33,039 22,378 47.6   116,816 89,916 29.9   Volt 370 5,063 -92.7   4,910 18,306 -73.2   Chevrolet Total 499,404 531,985 -6.1   1,958,925 2,036,023 -3.8   Acadia 19,471 25,128 -22.5   99,429 88,621 12.2   Canyon 6,525 8,219 -20.6   32,825 33,492 -2.0   Savana 3,136 2,905 8.0   24,226 19,684 23.1   Sierra HD 18,228 16,550 10.1   59,871 60,389 -0.9   Sierra LD 50,494 50,762 -0.5   172,452 159,165 8.3   Terrain 28,060 31,595 -11.2   101,470 114,314 -11.2   Yukon 20,966 25,366 -17.3   74,673 80,784 -7.6   GMC Total 146,880 160,525 -8.5   564,946 556,449 1.5   GM Vehicle Total* 735,909 785,229 -6.3   2,887,046 2,954,037 -2.3                     78 selling days for the QUARTER 4 this year and 77 for same QUARTER last year.  
    • By Drew Dowdell
      My wheels for the week are a 2020 Toyota Corolla XLE sedan. This one is well equipped with Toyota Safety Sense now standard, Toyota Entune with Apple CarPlay, Adaptive lighting system with automatic high beams, headed seats, and a JBL Premium audio system. It is rated for 29 city / 37 highway and we'll be putting that highway number to the test. We will be taking the Corolla to Northern Virginia for the weekend to visit family for the holidays. 
      The XLE differs from the 2019 Corolla SE hatchback that @William Maley recently tested in that it has the 1.8 liter engine instead of the 2.0 liter. This engine puts out 139 horsepower at 6100 RPM and 126 lb-ft of torque at 3900 rpm. About a 30 horsepower deficit compared to the SE.
       In my initial drive, I found the car to be snappy around town, but things got a little raucous when I went to merge onto the highway. Though it is a CVT, it has a fixed first gear. The fixed first gear does take away from the rubber band feeling most CVTs have. I took the Corolla on a set of twisty roads that I take all test vehicles on and the sedan, while no sports car, felt firmly planted and predictable around the curves. 
      One thing that is surprising is the sticker price; $28,084 for a Corolla without even the biggest engine seems quite steep. 
      So while I'm loading up the trunk with Christmas cheer, fire off any questions you have about the 2020 Toyota Corolla XLE.


      View full article
    • By Drew Dowdell
      My wheels for the week are a 2020 Toyota Corolla XLE sedan. This one is well equipped with Toyota Safety Sense now standard, Toyota Entune with Apple CarPlay, Adaptive lighting system with automatic high beams, headed seats, and a JBL Premium audio system. It is rated for 29 city / 37 highway and we'll be putting that highway number to the test. We will be taking the Corolla to Northern Virginia for the weekend to visit family for the holidays. 
      The XLE differs from the 2019 Corolla SE hatchback that @William Maley recently tested in that it has the 1.8 liter engine instead of the 2.0 liter. This engine puts out 139 horsepower at 6100 RPM and 126 lb-ft of torque at 3900 rpm. About a 30 horsepower deficit compared to the SE.
       In my initial drive, I found the car to be snappy around town, but things got a little raucous when I went to merge onto the highway. Though it is a CVT, it has a fixed first gear. The fixed first gear does take away from the rubber band feeling most CVTs have. I took the Corolla on a set of twisty roads that I take all test vehicles on and the sedan, while no sports car, felt firmly planted and predictable around the curves. 
      One thing that is surprising is the sticker price; $28,084 for a Corolla without even the biggest engine seems quite steep. 
      So while I'm loading up the trunk with Christmas cheer, fire off any questions you have about the 2020 Toyota Corolla XLE.

  • Posts

    • Prolly not quote as tight, but since both trucks require ‘loose surface’ (IE; dirt), I imagine there’s no difference either way.
    • It’s ironic- how many times have we said/read ‘why can’t we get the good vehicles here’ yet some markets get our leftovers for DECADES.
    • Note that it's the '66 they started from.   And they had a 292 Y-block V8.  Heres an '82... Similarly, Argentina built the '69 style Fairlane through '73, and the '69 style Fairlane through '81.    With a 6 and 292 Y-block. 
    • Certainly seems like an interesting company, interesting potential product.. kind of a skateboard w/ configurable bodywork variations.  I wonder how real they are or how much is smoke and mirrors presentation... 
    • 23 Views and no comments, very surprised that some have not stated how they feel about the style of this truck. @balthazar What do you think of this truck and semi from a style point of view? @Robert Hall @ccap41 @USA-1 @daves87rs @loki @smk4565 @ykX @regfootball @surreal1272 @oldshurst442 @ocnblu Take a look at the link, some very innovative seating options for the Truck/SUV/VAN depending on configuration.
  • Social Stream

  • Who's Online (See full list)

    There are no registered users currently online

  • My Clubs

About us

CheersandGears.com - Founded 2001

We ♥ Cars

Get in touch

Follow us

Recent tweets

facebook

×
×
  • Create New...