GMC Terrain, Equinox, and SRX Forum banner

1 - 20 of 49 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
103 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I test drove the Terrain and SRX back-to-back last month. The SRX has a nicer interior, with upholstered IP and such. It offers additional features. And it might handle a bit better and feel a little more "premium." But the Terrain performanced similarly, and had a much roomier and more comfortable rear seat.

People who've bought the new SRX: what did you feel it offered that the Equinox and Terrain did not, that made it worth the higher price?
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
598 Posts
The main focus is on the 2010 model, since that one shares a lot of the underpinnings of the Thetas (2010 Equinox and GMC Terrain). The previous SRX models were a completely different animal :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9 Posts
The SRX has more gadgets and corners better, a little light on HP but my wife can live with that. As
far as the price, If I ever get to drive it I will let you know. Had it eleven days and it's been down all
but a couple of hours. The car is beautiful, adgets galor, I have had plenty of time to Customize the
settings. My wife says all the buttons drive her crazy, Oh well.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
44 Posts
I think it's really all a matter of how much you want to spend and if there's an "image issue"... what image you want to project.

I know people who loved the idea of having an Escalade just because it was a Cadillac and I know people that would take a Yukon Denali over the Escalade because they feel it's got a more rugged vibe. It's the old Camero or Firebird thing... really the same what do YOU like.

The truth is if you get a Nox or a Terrain loaded to the max it's going to be pretty much as laid out & if they have the same engine everything should be equal to a SRX and you'll save a few dollars. But if someone really wants a Cadillac then they WANT a Cadillac.

My advice is compare apples to apples. Top of the line loaded Nox & Terrain to a SRX. Then look at the money and body style differences. From there one should grab you.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
446 Posts
Re: Equinox / Terrain vs. SRX: what about the Cadillac makes it worth the extra

a12632 said:
The SRX has more gadgets and corners better, a little light on HP but my wife can live with that. As
far as the price, If I ever get to drive it I will let you know. Had it eleven days and it's been down all
but a couple of hours. The car is beautiful, adgets galor, I have had plenty of time to Customize the
settings. My wife says all the buttons drive her crazy, Oh well.
I thought the SRX had quite a bit fewer buttons that the Terrain/'Nox had.

And, wait a couple months. They'll have the Turbo V6 version out with quite a bit more power. ;)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1 Posts
I'm looking at these three vehicles - in particular the Cadillac and the Equinox - as used vehicle replacements for my SAAB 9-5 Sportcombi in a few years. After checking the out at the Pittsburgh auto show I came to realize that the SRX does not have a spare tire. That's a thumbs down in my opinion, but even worse - it doesn't come with run flat tires.

Imagine the first flat you get on a rural road. Go to change the tire and - a can of fix-a-flat. Nice.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
44 Posts
revolver1978 said:
I'm looking at these three vehicles - in particular the Cadillac and the Equinox - as used vehicle replacements for my SAAB 9-5 Sportcombi in a few years. After checking the out at the Pittsburgh auto show I came to realize that the SRX does not have a spare tire. That's a thumbs down in my opinion, but even worse - it doesn't come with run flat tires.

Imagine the first flat you get on a rural road. Go to change the tire and - a can of fix-a-flat. Nice.
From what I understand you can order the "optional" spare tire and the regular set up is an electric onboard tire inflater pump.

I also see that they aren't offering the Ecoboost 4 cylinder only a 6 and a turbo 6 with best case senario gas mileage of only 24mpg.

That wouldn't do it for me I'm in love with the 32mpg and think it's a great long term investment. But if someone is set on a luxury nameplate it's really pretty good mpg compared to the Audi, Benz, BMW, Lexus and Infinity in it's class.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
635 Posts
revolver1978 said:
I'm looking at these three vehicles - in particular the Cadillac and the Equinox - as used vehicle replacements for my SAAB 9-5 Sportcombi in a few years. After checking the out at the Pittsburgh auto show I came to realize that the SRX does not have a spare tire. That's a thumbs down in my opinion, but even worse - it doesn't come with run flat tires.

Imagine the first flat you get on a rural road. Go to change the tire and - a can of fix-a-flat. Nice.
You can get a spare tire kit..see this link to Cadillac forum: http://www.cadillacforums.com/forums/cadillac-srx-second-generation-forum-2010/181435-srx-spare-tire-kit.html
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
318 Posts
SnowItch said:
Do yourself the favor of looking closely at the Nox and Terrain and trying to get a test drive. There isn't a huge gap between them and the SRX.
I concur. Test drove all 3. Couldn't bring myself to spend the extra cash for the image.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
277 Posts
I'm happy to say I agree with NY Joe & SnowItch on this one. I drove all three as well, saw very little difference between them, and ended up buying the Terrain more for looks than anything else. I've had a Cadillac, the CTS, and loved that car. Put 60K miles on it in 3 years with NO problems. The 3.6L rocked! I'd have that engine in the Terrain if it had been an option, but saw little difference between the I4 and 3L V6. With so few of any of these cars on the road, everyone wants to look at it anyway. And I certainly didn't mind saving a few $ on my choice!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
44 Posts
Islander said:
I'm happy to say I agree with NY Joe & SnowItch on this one. I drove all three as well, saw very little difference between them, and ended up buying the Terrain more for looks than anything else. I've had a Cadillac, the CTS, and loved that car. Put 60K miles on it in 3 years with NO problems. The 3.6L rocked! I'd have that engine in the Terrain if it had been an option, but saw little difference between the I4 and 3L V6. With so few of any of these cars on the road, everyone wants to look at it anyway. And I certainly didn't mind saving a few $ on my choice!
I think you made a wise choice my friend. I had a GMC Envoy and it was as good as any Cadillac IMO. I actually kinda liked the rugged luxury look over just more glitz.

Don't get me wrong I like Cadillacs. I've owned 2 in past. But to me if I was going to buy a Cadillac I'd buy a slightly used one a couple years old to get the luxury markup down... and you can't do that with the SRX because the 2009 or older SRX is one misbegotten body style that is nothing like the new 2010.

Buying a new Terrain or Nox is a much better value than the Caddy and you still get a super cool ride to show off.

Congratulations!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
446 Posts
Re: Equinox / Terrain vs. SRX: what about the Cadillac makes it worth the extra

I personally drive a Traverse with that same 3.6L V6. It is very much an awesome engine.

I think a list of feature differences would be helpful. Here's what I know so far...

- Turbo V6 engine
- More leather treatment (on dash and other areas)
- Wood trim
- Bose radio
- Rear cargo management system, adjustable rails
- Ventilated front seats
- Front seats have more adjustment options
- Heated front AND rear seats
- Xenon HID headlights
- Sport Suspension System with Real-Time Damping
- Bigger UltraView Sunroof
- Rainsense Front Wipers
- Dual Zone Climate Control
- Rear Climate Control
- A/C in glovebox (not sure if this is correct.)
- Adjustable Pedals
- 4 Years/50,000 Miles warranty (3/36 on others)
- Current road MPH notification in DIC
- Power folding mirrors
- 20" wheel option (19" only on other 2)
- Tail fins! ;)

And of course styling, like the pop up nav screen, exterior features and different dash and center console.

I did most of this from memory, so please update if I missed something or got it wrong. I'm sure there's somethings I got wrong.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
44 Posts
Re: Equinox / Terrain vs. SRX: what about the Cadillac makes it worth the extra

Narg said:
I personally drive a Traverse with that same 3.6L V6. It is very much an awesome engine.

I think a list of feature differences would be helpful. Here's what I know so far...

- Turbo V6 engine
- More leather treatment (on dash and other areas)
- Wood trim
- Bose radio
- Rear cargo management system, adjustable rails
- Ventilated front seats
- Front seats have more adjustment options
- Heated front AND rear seats
- Xenon HID headlights
- Sport Suspension System with Real-Time Damping
- Bigger UltraView Sunroof
- Rainsense Front Wipers
- Dual Zone Climate Control
- Rear Climate Control
- A/C in glovebox (not sure if this is correct.)
- Adjustable Pedals
- 4 Years/50,000 Miles warranty (3/36 on others)
- Current road MPH notification in DIC
- Power folding mirrors
- 20" wheel option (19" only on other 2)
- Tail fins! ;)

And of course styling, like the pop up nav screen, exterior features and different dash and center console.

I did most of this from memory, so please update if I missed something or got it wrong. I'm sure there's somethings I got wrong.

That's a whole lot from memory... and "tail fins" was a grin. ;D

I'm presuming these are all things that the Caddy has that are considered Caddy extras. I know for me personally sometimes there's just more stuff than needed or at least a lot of stuff I never really use (A/C in glovebox?).

If price is no concern then I guess it doesn't matter but for me I've always found a loaded SUV of any type to have all I ever needed. The thing that I like so much is that the SRX, Nox & Terrain all have a GREAT look on their own... so any of them with the options you personally want is a good choice in my book.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
698 Posts
"The optional all-wheel-drive system is Haldex based and incorporates an American Axle-sourced limited-slip rear differential featuring an electronically controlled clutch pack to distribute torque left or right."

Trusting an article from December 2008 as gospel is probably not such a good idea. I am skeptical that the above quotation is true. Sounds more like the setup put into the SRX. I'm pretty sure we don't get the limited slip c/w electronically controlled clutch pack in our vehicles.

Maybe a GM Engineer will eventually find his/her way to the forum and clear this up for us....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
698 Posts
I thought there was a thread on GMI that shed some more light on the system. I believe it's a "proactive" system that can apportion torque to the rear end on takeoff and in other situations where it calculates slip could occur. I wish the Owner's Manual was a but more technical when describing the AWD system.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6 Posts
Thanks for the replies. It's a shame we don't know more about it. I'm not that familiar with AWD systems in general, but I do not believe the AWD is engaged when my 'Nox is in reverse. I was plowed in to my parking space (parked head on to the curb) a few weeks back, and my left rear wheel was spinning and no other tires engaged. I'm pretty sure that's what was happening anyways. I had to "rock" the car to get out. I was a bit dissappointed in AWD at that point, but I guess it's not everyday you need/use it for going in reverse.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
446 Posts
Re: Equinox / Terrain vs. SRX: what about the Cadillac makes it worth the extra

That is interesting. IF that is the case, then shouldn't the front wheels have spun? The only way the rear wheels would have spun is if the clutch WAS engaged. Therefore showing the AWD system was working in reverse. Maybe the traction control was at fault in this case?

For those that know our story of our 'Nox purchase, it was in the middle of a rather heavy snow storm. Ours is FWD, but I did experience on that day a time where I had to go up a steep driveway with a good bit of a snow drift in front of the 'Nox. I did get stuck on the first attempt, and I believe one of the tires did spin at least a little. I had to back up and re-approach the drift, which then went right over it.

Overall, I think the traction control is great, but far from perfect. I've experienced this on other cars too. It doesn't stop wheel spin entirely. But, does help overall.
 
1 - 20 of 49 Posts
Top