Cadillac SRX Wins CAR & DRIVER Comparo! VW Touareg Gets Dead Last! Cayenne 2nd!

[plasmaloaf]

I had heard the rumors, and they were true. I just recieved my latest Car and Driver (November) and sure enough the final tally is as follows...

4th Place... VW Touareg: 171 points
3rd Place... Infiniti FX45: 184 points
2nd Place... Porsche Cayenne: 185 points
1st Place... Cadillac SRX: 189 points

I am just as surprised as you are! I guess GM isn't kidding about its comeback. It's been awhile since GM has won a C&D Comparison (except for Corvette). The 900 pound gorilla has awoken!

[PsyberVW]

Is this like the test where the G35 won because it sacrificed some of the higher quality materials in order to come in at a lower base price?

I dislike when they factor cost into the equation. We all know some things cost more regardless of performance/luxury/safety. etc... I say they should de-badge the cars and pretend all three were handed to them for free, then re-do their tests..

(I'm not just saying in this article, but for all articles. They should do like a "pre-tax" tally where it shows you which car is ultimately the best, then an "after-tax" total which can show you which one is cheapest, best "package", etc...

[spidy]

I am surprised since they named Touareg best luxury SUV of the year.

[sisiisis]

Quote, originally posted by PsyberVW »

Is this like the test where the G35 won because it sacrificed some of the higher quality materials in order to come in at a lower base price? I dislike when they factor cost into the equation. We all know some things cost more regardless of performance/luxury/safety. etc... I say they should de-badge the cars and pretend all three were handed to them for free, then re-do their tests.. (I'm not just saying in this article, but for all articles. They should do like a "pre-tax" tally where it shows you which car is ultimately the best, then an "after-tax" total which can show you which one is cheapest, best "package", etc...

Man, if you don't factor price into a comparison, then the highest price offering will probably win about 80% of the time.

[valder1]

interesting...

Well, don't ----- about price cause the SRX can be very very expensive if optioned.
Sounds like a trip to the book store for me -- cause I love the SRX. The sunroof!

valder.

[sharkytm]

the SRX is nice... very stiff chasis, suspension and loads of power.... BUT my pick would be a T'reg from next year (dont want a first year model)

[gobluevw]

Quote, originally posted by spidy »

I am surprised since they named Touareg best luxury SUV of the year.

im pretty sure they didnt specifically "name" it that, it just won a previous comparo with 8 other SUV's, like the avaitor, envoy, and smaller ones like that.

go caddy

in other news i got to play around in one of these the other day, but sadly not drive, GM let me rev it and play with the nav system/radio/sweet as hell automatic hard top.

one badass ride

[spidy]

Quote, originally posted by gobluevw »

im pretty sure they didnt specifically "name" it that, it just won a previous comparo with 8 other SUV's, like the avaitor, envoy, and smaller ones like that.

Maybe its just me, but from all the Touareg ads, it sounded that way. Oh well.

[sisiisis]

A few pics of the champ

[PseudoEnthusiast]

Quote, originally posted by PsyberVW »

Is this like the test where the G35 won because it sacrificed some of the higher quality materials in order to come in at a lower base price? I dislike when they factor cost into the equation. We all know some things cost more regardless of performance/luxury/safety. etc... I say they should de-badge the cars and pretend all three were handed to them for free, then re-do their tests.. (I'm not just saying in this article, but for all articles. They should do like a "pre-tax" tally where it shows you which car is ultimately the best, then an "after-tax" total which can show you which one is cheapest, best "package", etc...

In a market where many people spend as much on their car payment as their mortgage (and I think quite foolishly so) cost is still as big a factor as anything and if you try to do comparos irrespective of it, wouldn't you have hard time even determining comparo classes?

[PsyberVW]

Oh, and just to point out I'm not just making excuses for VW coming in last (since I haven't read the article - but am criticizing on their past comparos) I wanted to add that I'm more interested in the Cadillac than the VW as of late september.

I drove the Touareg and watched the test drive on SpeedTV for the caddy. I already like the Envoy well enough.. For my preference, the Cadillac seems a better fit.

[PsyberVW]

Quote, originally posted by PseudoEnthusiast »

In a market where many people spend as much on their car payment as their mortgage (and I think quite foolishly so) cost is still as big a factor as anything and if you try to do comparos irrespective of it, wouldn't you have hard time even determining comparo classes?

If this were CONSUMER REPORTS, I would definitely care about the price. But seeing as this is CAR & DRIVER, I'm only interested in performance numbers and driving impressions. Cost is totally irrelevant.

[valder1]

Well car and driver seems to care...

I mean, simply because the Ferrari 550 and Corvette Z06 are both GT cars doesn't mean they are in the same class... why? because of cost.

It does matter.

valder.

[PseudoEnthusiast]

Quote, originally posted by PsyberVW »

If this were CONSUMER REPORTS, I would definitely care about the price. But seeing as this is CAR & DRIVER, I'm only interested in performance numbers and driving impressions. Cost is totally irrelevant.

And to C&D it really is that much less relevant than it is to CR, which has to buy its own vehicles. In any case, aren'y you savvy enough to ignore the cost considerations (what few they make) and identify the best-driving model?

[spidy]

Ok here's the skinny.

Touareg V8

Highs: Faultless interior execution, rock-solid structure, great sounding stereo

Lows: Inattentive throttle, feather-light and uncertain steering, reluctant handler

The Verdict: A sophisticated and serene cruiser for those who don't need much sport in their utility vechile.

FX45

Highs: Quick, weighty steering; flat cornering; panache; the only navigation system that worked worth a damn

Lows; No comfort setting.

The Verdict; A sports coupe wearing a backpack. That's what you asked for, right?

Cayenne S

Highs; Better tuned for vigorous driving than its VW sibling; sonorous, powerful V8; excellent manumatic operation; cute key fob.

Lows; Porsche logo adds a 15-grand penalty, curb weight is nearly as heavy as its price, not as quick as a cadillac

The verdict; Its a touareg super sport.

SRX-V8

Highs; Long wheelbase provides excellent ride and interior roominess, an engine to be proud of, fluid handling

Lows; High doorsills, poorer fit and finish than in the Germans, occasional driveline lash

The Verdict; The station wagon with the best combination of sport and utility

Sorry about the spelling mistake. Typed real fast.

[PseudoEnthusiast]

Stupid question, but what's under the hood of the SRX?

[spockcat]

I wonder how they would have rated them if they had switched the Touareg and Porsche's wheels and tires? The all season tires on the Touareg are OK but better rubber would make it handle better.

[spidy]

4.6L 320hp 315lbft torque.

[vw86gti]

A big for GM. I can't remember the last time they won a camparo in Car and Driver. Time to go check the mail so I can read the article.

[PseudoEnthusiast]

Quote, originally posted by spidy »

4.6L 320hp 315lbft torque.

A RWD-oriented Northstar. OK.

[Professor Gascan]

Just so I'm clear, this is a SPORT utility test right? They should have included an allroad V8 for the hell of it then.

[sashae]

What's the pricing like on the SRX anyway? I could have sworn that that Infiniti was a *lot* cheaper than the other cars in that comparo.

-s

[fitch]

i would take the cayenne anyday

[spidy]

Quote, originally posted by sashae »

What's the pricing like on the SRX anyway? I could have sworn that that Infiniti was a *lot* cheaper than the other cars in that comparo. -s

Prices as tested follows

Infiniti FX45=52,670 Cheapest
Cadillac SRX=54,140
CayenneS=68,760
Touareg=53,265

[lip]

Either a V6 or V8 you choose.

Actually the SRX is really impressive in person. I can see how it won. A great all rounder.
Even the brochure looks like a million bucks.

Not sure how the Touareq fell so far relative to the last test.
In addition the Cayenne blew it out of the water- I have only driven the Cayenne, but I thought the VW would be closer


Modified by lip at 4:18 PM 10-2-2003

[PseudoEnthusiast]

Quote, originally posted by spidy »

Touareg=53,265

A $50,000 Volkswagen!?

Well.

[hawc]

Americans build good trucks.

(see I don't hate all things American)

[lip]

HAWC-

Quote, originally posted by hawc »

(see I don't hate all things American)

Hey get ooot of here eh ! Your a North American- Most people in the world wouldn't be able to tell the difference between a Canadian and a Californian

[J-Tim]

Damn, that SRX thing looks absolutely hideous!

[3WheelGTi]

Quote, originally posted by lip »

Either a V6 or V8 you choose. Actually the SRX is really impressive in person. I can see how it won. A great all rounder. Even the brochure looks like a million bucks.

It's even more impressive behind the wheel. I had the opportunity to autocross 2 of them last summer and I'll say the the handling is nearly on par (better?) with the Grand Prix GTP I drove that day too.

As stated, the engine is very similar to the RWD Northstar in the XLR. But, it has different engine mounts. It is actually a separate engine in production, but comes from the same line.

I worked in the plant that makes the FWD, RWD, and AWD Northstars so I love to hear praise for them. They're all very smooth and very powerful.

Has anyone else actually drive an SRX yet?

[Oliver@triplezoom]

Quote, originally posted by gobluevw »

im pretty sure they didnt specifically "name" it that, it just won a previous comparo with 8 other SUV's, like the avaitor, envoy, and smaller ones like that.

Actually, they did name it luxury SUV of the year, in their 5 Best Trucks feature. Forget what issue it was; I believe it was in the spring some time.

Definitely sounds like an interesting comparison. Can't wait to read it.

[mutcth]

Quote, originally posted by PsyberVW »

If this were CONSUMER REPORTS, I would definitely care about the price. But seeing as this is CAR & DRIVER, I'm only interested in performance numbers and driving impressions. Cost is totally irrelevant.

For what it's worth, we (CR) do not score anything we test based on cost. We may make value-related statements in the conclusion, but price does not affect how a product scores in our tests.

There may be some confusion above - Car and Driver doesn't (or they never used to) factor in price either. Road and Track does though....

All opinions my own, not CRs.

Tom

[PsyberVW]

Quote, originally posted by PseudoEnthusiast »

In any case, aren'y you savvy enough to ignore the cost considerations (what few they make) and identify the best-driving model?

Here's my point:
While I may make my own best decision by filtering the trivial things and focusing on what really matters..

I would expect a "comparo" in an automotive journal to be just as objective. Put away your expectations based on "price" and other things which have no direct effect on the driving experience. Just test the cars and give your experience based on the drive. You can still have great creative writing while sticking to the facts.

As Valder pointed out, corvette, viper, ferrari. What really seperates them? If you ask me, they are all in the same class (but possibly distinct subclasses -v8/v10/v12-). There are plenty of ways to compare the cars and still completely ignore "cost".

That's just how I feel about these magazines anymore. It seems everytime I read a "shootout" type of article, somebody has to "ding" a vehicle points because "it's too expensive". No such thing. The car costs what people are willing to pay. I want to read Car & Driver to get DRIVING impressions and CAR reviews - NOT SHOPPING REPORTS. I also don't like it because it can taint people's perceptions of vehicles.

If I tell you the 350x costs 1/2 the price of a Porsche and handles exactly like a 911, you might buy it. But if I tell you the 350x costs as much and handles exactly like a 911, you might buy the 911 instead. Why? You'd say that $90K is too much for a Nissan, but OK for a Porsche...??

But if I show you both cars and tell you simply, the 350x handles as well as the 911, without mentioning price, then I've still "reported" the facts without tainting your image of the vehicle. All you know is that the car "handles like a 911". It's up to you to decide if the price is too high or too low, but at least you won't have any expectations that it's "cheap", "overpriced", etc...

[PsyberVW]

mutcth - I didn't mean that literally, I was just making an example. However, I would expect your publication to focus more on "costs" (from purchase price to maintenanace, etc..).

[jastevenson]

But the only car worth owning out of all of those is the FX