2014 Cadillac SRX Review

Frt3qtr

We're not saying the 2014 Cadillac SRX's design is old, but college freshmen have gone on to earn bachelor's degrees since the luxury crossover's last overhaul. When it'll graduate to a new design is unclear, but Cars.com reviewer Aaron D. Bragman says it's managed to stay up-to-date with the latest technology and interior fashions. Where it's fallen behind its classmates is fuel economy and cargo space. Does the SRX still make the grade, or will it need a major update to return to the head of the class? Read Bragman's review and decide.

2014 Cadillac SRX Review

Cars.com photo by Aaron Bragman

Comments 

The MKX and RX were both new for 2011 which means they are barely newer than the SRX. And unlike those 2 the SRX did get brand new center stack and gauge cluster 2013 after getting new engine for 2012. So I'm not sure it's far to say the vehicle has barely changed in 5 years. Considering it's either the 2nd or 3rd best selling 5 seat crossover I'm not sure why the pricing is being criticized, its on par with key competitors. If you compare to something like the X3 it's probably a good value.

Vik

I think Sheth has some good points here. Would be interested to hear some editorial response on this.

George

The RX was new for the 2010 model year, and is on a six year cycle.
The SRX isn't an old design, it is a bad design.

Bad design based on what? But thanks for reminding me that the RX is just as old as the SRX and has actually been changed LESS than the SRX. The reviewer kept comparing SRX to MDX which is newest entry in this segment and is a 7 seater. The X3, MKX and RX would be more comparable.

George

The RX went through its mid-cycle refresh for the '13 model year.
Nice spare wheel in the SRX, what, you have to get that as an option.
One of the worst red turn signals of any vehicle are on the back of this one. If the throwback [more like throw away, please] tailfin LED tail/brake lights are illuminated, you almost can not see the small square turn signals.
GM used a crap-tastic 2.8 liter single turbocharged port injected engine, or a too small/too tally geared 3.0 V6.
Both were replace with what should have been standard on day one, the 3.6 V6.
6 lug wheels aren't necessary on a 4500 pound vehicle.
The 20" wheels are so heavy [and overly wide 8" for a 235/55 tire, that increases sidewall rate], you absolutely need the MR dampers to make the ride acceptable.
The rear 'design' leads to 10 cubic feet less cargo volume.

Post a Comment 

Please remember a few rules before posting comments:

  • If you don't want people to see your email address, simply type in the URL of your favorite website or leave the field empty.
  • Do not mention specific car dealers by name. Feel free to mention your city, state and brand.
  • Try to be civil to your fellow blog readers. This blog is not a fan or enthusiast forum, it is meant to help people during the car-buying process and during the time between purchases, so shoppers can keep a pulse on the market.
  • Stay on topic. We want to hear your opinions and thoughts, but please only comment about the specified topic in the blog post.
view posting rules

If you have a TypeKey or TypePad account, please Sign In

Search Results

KickingTires Search Results for

Search Kicking Tires

KickingTires iPhone App
Ask.cars.com