oh wow I wish I got that lucky in AC lol, I bought mine new and remember thinking the same thing about them, I don't know how the base engines in the newer ones like you have are, but the 3.6L was worth the extra money back in 04, I tested both models. I would love to get me one of them CTS V wagons, they are bad ass!As you can see by avatar and name I started here on the mark iii side....which I have a 97 mark and a 93 mark...thank god they start up great as well...now I work both sides of the forum sort of like Dr. Jeckel and Mr. Hide LOL!. PS I won the 2012 CTS Coupe in Atlantic city. THANKS FOR THAT I WOULD HAVE NEVER KNOWN HOW GREAT AND COOL THEY ARE, not to mention "FAST"
just curious was it your experience with the CTS that helped you guys decide on getting the SRX?l'm up north in Stanhope n.j. it's 1 degree f and both my 2012 cts and my wifes 2013 srx started just fine... loe my caddies:Beer
just curious was it your experience with the CTS that helped you guys decide on getting the SRX?
What a beutiful color! How about the twin turbo version of the 3.6L, now that thing's got POWER! 420 out of a V6! I looked at getting the 1st gen SRX back in 2007 it had that VVT version of the 4.6L Northstar in it, I fell in love with it, I didn't get it because I had just paid off the CTS and wanted to go a little while without a car payment. Then I drove a DTS and fell in love with that even more, but by that time I wanted something with 4X4 so inended up with a 2012 Chevy Tahoe LT, even though I am a big GM guy, I still gave Ford Expedition a look, and the Tahoe was just over all better, more power, better looks (in my opinion), better equipped, better 4X4 system, I also looked at like 2010 Explorers before they changed, and liked that, but was looking for something new or close to it (10,000 miles) and it had like 60,000 miles. Tahoe seemed to have better fuel economy than both as well, but when your in the market for a vehicle like those, fuel economy isn't a concern, since they are all pretty bad lol.
I hear ya, im not one to get antsy about fuel economy either, that's not why you buy Cadillacs and Lincolns right LOL, my CTS averages between 28 and 34, but its mostly a to and from work car now so a lot of highway driving. My Tahoe gets any ware from 16 to 18, they try and push their whole Active Fuel Management cylinder deactivation system, actually pretty interesting stuff, you cant tell any difference and there's no loss of power, certainly an improvement from the one Cadillac came up with in the 80's.View attachment 828464895
the combined fuel economy on the CTS is 23mpg and 19mpg on the SRX ....our explorers average is 13mpg.....what is great is that my 97 mark averages 28mpg..of course my 93 mark is a hot rod and I don't care about mileage.:shifty: