TESTED: 2010 Cadillac SRX Turbo AWD Premium
WHAT IS IT? A four-door luxury crossover in the mold of the Lexus RX.
HOW MUCH? $53,980, including optional ($1,295) rear-seat entertainment system.
WHAT’S UNDER THE HOOD? 2.8-liter turbo V-6 (300 horsepower, 295 pound-feet of torque); 6-speed automatic transmission with manual shift mode.
IS IT THIRSTY? The federal mileage estimate is 15 m.p.g. city, 22 m.p.g. highway.
GENERALLY speaking, you can look at an engine’s stat sheet and guess what kind of vehicle it might power. If the horsepower number is much higher than the torque, the motor probably belongs under the hood of a lightweight, high-revving sports car.
So if I told you an engine made 265 horsepower but only 223 pound-feet of torque, you’d probably guess it was designed for some frenetic two-seater. Alas, those stats apply to the Cadillac SRX’s base engine, a 3-liter V-6 that is the George Costanza of motors: it shows up for work, but nobody can quite figure out why it’s there.
To address the torque issue, Cadillac has added a turbocharged V-6 to the lineup. The upgraded motor is smaller — 2.8 liters — but cranks out 300 horsepower and 295 pound-feet of torque. The resulting vehicle, the SRX Turbo, is an improvement over the base model, but still a frustrating reminder of the Old G.M.’s empire of silliness.
The current SRX was developed in tandem with the Saab 9-4X crossover, which was put in limbo until Saab was adopted by Spyker Cars. The 9-4X, which makes its debut at the Los Angeles auto show next month, will also use the 2.8, previously exclusive to Saabs in the United States.
The single-turbo V-6 will make sense in the 9-4X because it’s in keeping with the modern dictum that all Saabs must be turbocharged. But it’s unfortunate that Cadillac didn’t use its own direct-injection 3.6-liter V-6, which is — no offense to Saab — better. I guess the product planners figured it would be better for a Cadillac to use a Saab engine rather than the other way around.
The turbocharged V-6 feels pretty lively in a 3,200-pound Saab 9-3, but the SRX weighs about 1,000 pounds more. That does more than just blunt the performance. Thanks to the SRX’s combination of torque and curb weight, the Aisin automatic transmission can’t quite cope. So the engine management system artificially limits torque in the first and second gears. I could understand that if the monster under the hood was a metal-shredding seismic demon, but 295 pound-feet would seem within the limits of modern transmission technology. Are the first two gears made of Camembert?
The 2009 SRX had a V-8 that made 315 pound-feet of torque — and a transmission that had no problem with that.
The SRX with the turbo 2.8 actually stacks up well against its main rival, the Lexus RX 350 with a 275-horsepower V-6. But it’s hard not to glance covetously at G.M.’s other propulsion options. In the all-wheel-drive Cadillac CTS wagon, the direct-injected 3.6-liter V-6 makes 304 horsepower and delivers 26 m.p.g. on the highway. And it does so on regular-grade gasoline. The 2.8 requires premium fuel to deliver its advertised power.
(Cadillac is staying mum on the possibility that the 3.6 may end up in the SRX, but I’d bet a shiny penny that it’s a matter of when, and not if.)
G.M. also makes a 2-liter direct-injection turbo 4, which until recently was found in the Chevy Cobalt SS and the Pontiac Solstice. That’s a great little engine that produces up to 290 horsepower and 340 pound-feet of torque. What I’m saying is, if G.M. went to its cupboard for a 300-horsepower motive device, this 2.8-liter is like Kellen Clemens on the New York Jets’ depth chart: third string.
The good news is that the Turbo gets decent gas mileage — I never dipped below 20 m.p.g., even in town — and it offers the mellow, effortless power of a forced-induction engine (at least, once you’re in third gear and getting full thrust).
The Haldex all-wheel-drive system can send 100 percent of torque to the rear and up to 80 percent side-to-side across the rear axles. The system minimizes the pulling-to-the-side condition called torque steer and makes the tall wagon feel agile.
Despite the imperfect situation under the hood, the new SRX is quite popular. Enthusiasts liked the old SRX, but it never sold well, whereas the new one emphasizes luxury and style over performance. That formula has put it in second place in its segment’s sales scrum, behind the Lexus.
But if Caddy wants to topple Lexus, and maybe steal a few BMW customers, I have an idea how that could be done. It involves the 3.6-liter V-6, a couple of turbochargers and a new transmission. Some ask why you’d build an SRX-V. I ask, why not?
Continue reading the main story