Comments on: First Images of the Cadillac SRX Crossover released http://www.auto-a-holic.com/first-images-of-the-cadillac-srx-crossover-released/ Tue, 06 Jan 2009 10:55:43 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7 hourly 1 By: Recent Links Tagged With "crossover" - JabberTags http://www.auto-a-holic.com/first-images-of-the-cadillac-srx-crossover-released/comment-page-1/#comment-189 Recent Links Tagged With "crossover" - JabberTags Sat, 04 Oct 2008 03:19:22 +0000 http://www.auto-a-holic.com/?p=256#comment-189 [...] public links >> crossover First Images of the Cadillac SRX Crossover released Saved by mattparcher on Thu 02-10-2008 The Greatest Superhero Crossover Of All Time Saved by jf [...] [...] public links >> crossover First Images of the Cadillac SRX Crossover released Saved by mattparcher on Thu 02-10-2008 The Greatest Superhero Crossover Of All Time Saved by jf [...]

]]> By: Damon http://www.auto-a-holic.com/first-images-of-the-cadillac-srx-crossover-released/comment-page-1/#comment-96 Damon Sun, 17 Aug 2008 10:19:58 +0000 http://www.auto-a-holic.com/?p=256#comment-96 From the side profile view, there seems to be a great deal of visual weight ahead of the fron wheels. Is it necessary to have so much up front? Is there no way to have moved the front wheels a bit more forward (or the front of the grille a bit rearward) in the design? Head-on, the styling is stunning; and the character lines in the body sides are bold. When I glimse at a view of the rear-quarter view, I'm left thinking that the rear bumper seems to be too thin for all that boldness. I understand the desire to cut the visual hight of the car by adding matte black below a certain point, but the end result of this application makes the remaining important elements in the back of the car look too delicate. Thoughts? From the side profile view, there seems to be a great deal of visual weight ahead of the fron wheels. Is it necessary to have so much up front? Is there no way to have moved the front wheels a bit more forward (or the front of the grille a bit rearward) in the design? Head-on, the styling is stunning; and the character lines in the body sides are bold. When I glimse at a view of the rear-quarter view, I’m left thinking that the rear bumper seems to be too thin for all that boldness. I understand the desire to cut the visual hight of the car by adding matte black below a certain point, but the end result of this application makes the remaining important elements in the back of the car look too delicate.

Thoughts?

]]> By: Turkle http://www.auto-a-holic.com/first-images-of-the-cadillac-srx-crossover-released/comment-page-1/#comment-95 Turkle Sun, 17 Aug 2008 10:18:06 +0000 http://www.auto-a-holic.com/?p=256#comment-95 I'm sure the SRX will appeal to more Americans than the CTS wagon but my choice is still the CTS. I’m sure the SRX will appeal to more Americans than the CTS wagon but my choice is still the CTS.

]]> By: MAB http://www.auto-a-holic.com/first-images-of-the-cadillac-srx-crossover-released/comment-page-1/#comment-94 MAB Sun, 17 Aug 2008 10:17:18 +0000 http://www.auto-a-holic.com/?p=256#comment-94 I like this a lot, it looks like an SUV version of the highly successful CTS, while also staying true to the Provoq concept, and since its a crossover it should fare better than the Escalade in sales. And yes, its built on a shortened version of the Outlook/Acadia/Traverse frame, meaning it should fare better in economy than those models due to its decreased weight and the fact that it uses the DI 3.6 rather than the standard V6 used in those models. That also means it probably won't have 3rd rowing seating like those models, but eh, kids are overrated. I like this a lot, it looks like an SUV version of the highly successful CTS, while also staying true to the Provoq concept, and since its a crossover it should fare better than the Escalade in sales. And yes, its built on a shortened version of the Outlook/Acadia/Traverse frame, meaning it should fare better in economy than those models due to its decreased weight and the fact that it uses the DI 3.6 rather than the standard V6 used in those models. That also means it probably won’t have 3rd rowing seating like those models, but eh, kids are overrated.

]]> By: Shawn McBride http://www.auto-a-holic.com/first-images-of-the-cadillac-srx-crossover-released/comment-page-1/#comment-92 Shawn McBride Sun, 17 Aug 2008 08:35:52 +0000 http://www.auto-a-holic.com/?p=256#comment-92 For Cadillac to make a truck is just plane stupid, they make CARS. Stick to what you know. 40 Grand for a truck that will NEVER go off road is just STUPID. Leave the truck to the big boys. For Cadillac to make a truck is just plane stupid, they make CARS. Stick to what you know. 40 Grand for a truck that will NEVER go off road is just STUPID. Leave the truck to the big boys.

]]>