Model Year | 2009 | 2010 | |
Model | Cadillac SRX | Cadillac CTS | |
Engine | |||
Transmission | |||
Drivetrain | |||
Body | 4dr SUV | 4dr Wagon | |
Difference | |||
Wheelbase | 116.4 in | 113.4 in | 3 in |
Length | 194.9 in | 191.6 in | 3.3 in |
Width | 72.6 in | 72.6 in | 0 in |
Height | 67.8 in | 59.1 in | 8.7 in |
Curb Weight | 4164 lb. | 4031 lb. | 133 lb. |
Fuel Capacity | 20.0 gal. | 18.0 gal. | 2 gal. |
Headroom, Row 1 | 40.3 in | 38.8 in | 1.5 in |
Shoulder Room, Row 1 | 58.7 in | 56.7 in | 2 in |
Hip Room, Row 1 | 56.3 in | 55.1 in | 1.2 in |
Legroom, Row 1 | 42.1 in | 42.4 in | -0.3 in |
Headroom, Row 2 | 38.4 in | 37.2 in | 1.2 in |
Shoulder Room, Row 2 | 57.6 in | 56.3 in | 1.3 in |
Hip Room, Row 2 | 56.3 in | 54.1 in | 2.2 in |
Legroom, Row 2 | 41.0 in | 35.9 in | 5.1 in |
Headroom, Row 3 | 35.0 in | 0.0 in | 35 in |
Shoulder Room, Row 3 | 43.6 in | 0.0 in | 43.6 in |
Hip Room, Row 3 | 55.1 in | 0.0 in | 55.1 in |
Legroom, Row 3 | 24.2 in | 0.0 in | 24.2 in |
Total Legroom | 107.3 in (over 3 rows) | 78.3 in (over 2 rows) | 29 in |
Cargo Volume, Minimum | 8.4 ft3 | 25.0 ft3 | -16.6 ft3 |
Cargo Volume, Behind R2 | 32.4 ft3 | 25.0 | 7.4 ft3 |
Cargo Volume, Maximum | 69.5 ft3 | 58.0 ft3 | 11.5 ft3 |
2009 Cadillac SRX Seat Room and Comfort: Pros | ||
Year | Body/Powertrain | Comment |
2008 | 4dr SUV 255-horsepower 3.6L V6 5-speed shiftable automatic AWD |
2 teenage kids love it see full Cadillac SRX review |
2009 Cadillac SRX Seat Room and Comfort: Cons | ||
Year | Body/Powertrain | Comment |
2008 | 4dr SUV 255-horsepower 3.6L V6 5-speed shiftable automatic AWD |
Seat belts attached to front seats and not adjustable up and down. Lower sitting heighth than Lexus or other crossover SUVs or at least the appearance of same. see full Cadillac SRX review |
2008 | 4dr SUV 255-horsepower 3.6L V6 5-speed shiftable automatic AWD |
The center console is too wide and gets in the way see full Cadillac SRX review |
2010 Cadillac CTS Seat Room and Comfort: Cons | ||
Year | Comment | |
The optional Recaro seats are a must despite their $3,400 price, as they provide power-adjustable side bolsters that provide far better lateral support than the standard seats. But the Recaro seats aren't very comfortable, with overly firm bulges here and there. Though the lumbar support can be power-adjusted vertically as well as in-and-out, I couldn't find any position where it was comfortable and ended up adjusting it for minimum intrusiveness. see full Cadillac CTS review |
None of our members have yet commented on the seat room and comfort of the 2010 Cadillac CTS.