Pacifica vs Cadillac SRX

  • Thread starter Thread starter MoPar Man
  • Start date Start date
M

MoPar Man

The Pacifica is a bit lower, a bit wider, and a bit longer than the
SRX. It's practically identical in weight. It's also $10k cheaper
than the SRX. SRX is either RWD or AWD in both V6 and available V8
(with 320 Hp).

Chrysler had a vision of a primo hybrid between a station-wagon and
suv.

Looks like Cadillac built it.
 
Yeah, but is the drivetrain in the Cadillac a *real* Cadillac drivetrain
with a Northstar engine, or is it the same Opel-derived piece of
excrement they've been peddling in the CTS for a few years? Cadillac's
stylists should be shot, too. How can the same car company that produced
the beautifully understated Seville STS in recent years degenerate to
the Tonka-toy styling of the CTS and SRX.
Click to expand...

The SRX is built from the CTS, which is made in the US (the Catera was the
rebadged Opel). But all new Cadillacs are butt-ugly -- SRX, XLR, CTS.
 
MoPar said:
The Pacifica is a bit lower, a bit wider, and a bit longer than the
SRX. It's practically identical in weight. It's also $10k cheaper
than the SRX. SRX is either RWD or AWD in both V6 and available V8
(with 320 Hp).

Chrysler had a vision of a primo hybrid between a station-wagon and
suv.

Looks like Cadillac built it.
Click to expand...

Yeah, but is the drivetrain in the Cadillac a *real* Cadillac drivetrain
with a Northstar engine, or is it the same Opel-derived piece of
excrement they've been peddling in the CTS for a few years? Cadillac's
stylists should be shot, too. How can the same car company that produced
the beautifully understated Seville STS in recent years degenerate to
the Tonka-toy styling of the CTS and SRX.

Sorry, I'll take the Pacifica any day, even if it is a bit underpowered.
At least I know it'll be RELIABLE power- the 3.5 is proven.
 
Available engines are the 320HP 4.6L Northstar V8 WT or the 260HP 3.6L
V6 WT (assuming same as used in the CTS). Both engine use the
"Performance Transmission", which can be used either as a full automatic
or a clutchless 5-speed manual.
 
Like the Opel Sigma?
http://www.opel.de/

'Butt'-ugly is right...

Sorry, because of frames I can't link directly to the photos, but in left
sidebar is a drop-down menu headed "Opel Automobile".
Then Galerie/Fotos.

I had one on rental a few months ago in Germany. Actually it was quite nice
inside, butI couldn't get to grips with the shape. Reminiscent of the
'eccentric' Renault Vel Satis.
http://www.renault.fr/RenaultSITe/cars/vn_car_home_4bt.jsp?BV_SessionID=@@@@
1059725287.1068214058@@@@&BV_EngineID=ccchadcjleddehkcfngcfkmdfkjdfmh.0&car=
Velsatis

DAS
--
 
Lloyd said:
The SRX is built from the CTS, which is made in the US (the Catera was the
rebadged Opel).
Click to expand...

The Catera was a re-badged Opel, but (at least up until this year) the
CTS used an Opel *engine* and not a Cadillac/Northstar design. Check on
rec.autos.tech for a few rants about what a piece of junk it is.

But all new Cadillacs are butt-ugly -- SRX, XLR, CTS.
Click to expand...



They still sell the Seville, but I'm sure it's days are numbered.
 
"MoPar Man" in his continuing ranting about how old Chryslers are better then
new said:
Chrysler had a vision of a primo hybrid between a station-wagon and
suv.

Looks like Cadillac built it.
Click to expand...

Don't think so. As the owner of a Pacifica I'll take it anyday over an upscale
Chevrolet SUV.
 
RPhillips47 said:
"MoPar Man" in his continuing ranting about how old Chryslers are better then
new ones wrote:




Don't think so. As the owner of a Pacifica I'll take it anyday over an upscale
Chevrolet SUV.
Click to expand...

He never mentioned the Escalade. But don't let facts bother you... :-)

I too prefer the Pacifica over the Caddy, but the Caddy in question is
NOT a re-badged Chevy suv
 
Steve said:
He never mentioned the Escalade.
Click to expand...

Neither did I.

and followed it with:
But don't let facts bother you... :-)
Click to expand...

Maybe you should get the facts correct...;-)

and finished it with:
I too prefer the Pacifica over the Caddy, but the Caddy in question is
NOT a re-badged Chevy suv
Click to expand...

Obviously you have not seen the Equinox. Why don't you compare the SRX and the
Equinox? True, the SRX is a Sigma and the Equinox is a Theta, but to me, at
least, the SRX only looks like a stretched version of the Equinox. Of course my
conclusions are based only on photographs. Perhaps after I have seen them in
person I will have a different opinion.
 
If you're going to make THAT comparison, then the Equinox is more nearly
a re-badged Cadillac. It never existed as a Chervrolet prior to the SRX.
Click to expand...
The Equinox is a rebadged Saturn VUE. The SRX is built off the CTS. They are
not related.
 
RPhillips47 said:
Obviously you have not seen the Equinox. Why don't you compare the SRX and the
Equinox?
Click to expand...


If you're going to make THAT comparison, then the Equinox is more nearly
a re-badged Cadillac. It never existed as a Chervrolet prior to the SRX.
 
Lloyd Parker said:
The Equinox is a rebadged Saturn VUE. The SRX is built off the CTS. They
are
not related.
Click to expand...

You, TOO, ignored my complete post wherein I stated the SRX is a Sigma and the
Equinox is a Theta. But, of course, you don't bother with that. My point was
that, to the casual observer (which the majority of the motoring public IS),
they will look related.The general public will not gave a rats a** as to the
platform, nor do I. Got it??? Good!!!
 
Steve said:
If you're going to make THAT comparison, then the Equinox is more nearly
a re-badged Cadillac. It never existed as a Chervrolet prior to the SRX.
Click to expand...

Whatever!!!!!????? They were developed together and the SRX was introduced
first, but I still hold my opinion and I will continue to hold that opinion. If
you are going to quote and repsond read the WHOLE statement (remember, I
followed those two sentences with explanations which, of course, you ignored)
and don't try to twist things by posting out of context to suit your whims.
 
Whatever!!!!!????? They were developed together and the SRX was introduced
first,
Click to expand...

Like saying the Intrepid and the Neon were developed around the same time.
Non sequitir.
 
:

Like saying the Intrepid and the Neon were developed around the same time.
Non sequitir.
Click to expand...

You know something, Lloyd???? If someone posted "Jesus Saves", you would
respond "So does Christ" just to argue!!!!

Go back and read my COMPLETE response and follow-up posting wherein I stated my
opinion was from the photos I have seen and couild change when I see them in
person. From the photos they look similar and given how GM, Ford and Chrysler
have traditionally shared platforms, etc., in developing vehicles it is MY
OPINION that many will think the same on these, so your response quoted above
means nothing. But, of course, in your isolated world of education where you
have no real clue as to what goes on in the real world, you think it does.
 
RPhillips47 said:
:




Whatever!!!!!????? They were developed together and the SRX was introduced
first,
Click to expand...

Exactly. So it is absolutely NOT a "Rebadged Chevy SUV" by any definition.
but I still hold my opinion and I will continue to hold that opinion
Click to expand...

And I'll stick to fact.
 
:


Exactly. So it is absolutely NOT a "Rebadged Chevy SUV" by any definition.


And I'll stick to fact.
Click to expand...

So, if you are going to stick to fact, STICK TO FACT! My original quote:

"Don't think so. As the owner of a Pacifica I'll take it anyday over an upscale
Chevrolet SUV." I don't see re-badged at all in there, and in further posts I
gave my impression as to what I felt when I saw the pictures and I reserved the
right to change my opinion after I see both vehicles in person. But, of course,
you always only quote out of context and edit what you post to.

I find it amazing that in a Chrysler group you are defending/defining a
Cadillac and an Equinox, a Sigma and a Theta. I gave up on GM a long, long time
ago and no matter what you post, whether fact or not, I will stick to my
opinion. Got it Stevie-boy??? Good!!!! Now let's see if you respond as I think
you will. C'mon, Stevie-boy, don't let me, or the group, down.
 
after seeing the pacifica's on the road awhile now i can say there the car has
some issues and it's not the kind your local garage guy can deal with. the factory
service manuals are full of incorrect repair info the car sure isn't worth the
money they want for it
 
mic canic said:
after seeing the pacifica's on the road awhile now i can say there the car has
some issues and it's not the kind your local garage guy can deal with. the factory
service manuals are full of incorrect repair info the car sure isn't worth the
money they want for it
Click to expand...

Well, dish it out then. If it's got issues, we're dying to know what they
are, and you're one of the guys in the best position to tell us.

Give us some examples of how the FSM is wrong, too.

--Geoff
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest threads

Back
Top