Compared: 2010 Volvo XC60 T6 vs 2010 Cadillac SRX 2.8T

by Stu Fowle, Photos by the Author

Aug 3, 2010 - 10:09:33 AM

For the first time since it launched last spring, the Volvo XC60 T6 has another turbocharged, six-cylinder crossover with which to compete. On top of that, the Cadillac SRX’s 2.8-liter turbocharged V6 also hails from Sweden, seeing as it was yanked from Saab’s parts bin. As such, we thought it was only fitting to invite a 2011 Cadillac SRX 2.8T to the Swedespeed office for a throwdown with our long-term XC60.

You’ve probably noticed that our Volvo isn’t entirely stock. It comes to this showdown with a few tricks up its sleeve, including 20-inch wheels and a set of lower sport springs from H&R. Still, wheels that large are offered from the factory and we drove the car a number of months on the stock suspension and remember it well. We’ll be writing as if both cars are stock, despite what you see in the photos.

These two look about as different as two competing five-passenger crossovers could. The Volvo, as odd as it is from a historical point of view, is all curves, while the SRX could easily be called the Cadillac Origami. Both are tasteful executions of their respective styles, but we think the Volvo’s less vertical approach to details like the pillars, lights, and grille contribute to a visually lower stance in a segment intended to deliver car-like vehicles with more space. Some might view this as the Cadillac seeming more spacious, but we like the less trucky approach from Volvo. We also wonder how well the Cadillac’s design will stand up to the test of time, even if it is quite striking driving down the road today. Both make smart use of modern touches like LED light tubes for the parking lights and taillights.



It’s much the same story inside. The Caddy is all edges, the Volvo all flowing curves. Our XC60’s black leather/aluminum trim combination looks a bit sterile and German, but with the optional matte finish wood it looks airy and earthy. Larger windows at the rear and a dash that falls away from the seats makes the Volvo’s interior feel open, while the Cadillac feels more cramped with an in-your-face upright dash and tiny rear windows.

With fluffier leather and darker, more contoured wood, plus that legendary Cadillac smell, the SRX’s inside is a cigar bar to the XC60’s coffee shop. It fees classic and luxurious, if a bit stuffy. It’s also surprising then that the Cadillac’s gadgetry far outpaces the Volvo’s. It uses a navigation screen that slides itself away inside the dashboard, leaving just enough pixels exposed to display audio and climate information. Fully exposed, the navigation screen is huge, high in definition, and controlled by touch. It honestly makes the Volvo’s lower-def screen controlled by a steering wheel-mounted joystick even more frustrating than it already was. If you love cranking the bass on your audio system, the Cadillac’s Bose also has the edge; otherwise, the Volvo’s Dynaudio is quite good.

What’s also quite good is the XC60’s turbocharged inline six, which produces 281 hp until it gets an upgrade past 300 hp for the 2011 model year. It sounds great, delivers smooth, linear power, and makes the XC60 impressively quick. Unfortunately, we can’t say the same for the Caddy’s Saab motor, which reminds us how far turbocharger technology has come in the past few years. Turbo lag that was normal when this engine first debuted now feels retro, and not in a good way. The 2.8-liter is pretty sluggish until about 3500 rpm, when it finally comes alive, too little too late. Keep the engine on boost all the time and its actually quite impressive. However, the car’s clunky automatic transmission, even in sport mode, is hesitant to use its lower gears.



The Volvo’s six-speed isn’t a ton quicker, but the engine does its part by having adequate torque reserves regardless of engine speed. Throttle tip-in is sharper in the XC60 too, contributing to a livelier feel. We applaud Cadillac for using turbocharging for the first time in its long, storied history, but it’s too bad this first application isn’t more impressive. Despite a smaller displacement (by 0.2 liters) the Cadillac matches the Volvo’s 22 mpg highway rating and falls short in the city, 15 mpg versus 16.

Only the Cadillac’s brakes are more disappointing than the engine. Even if we might complain about the Volvo’s steering being a touch on the light and vague side, its engineers did a fine job of making all of its systems — throttle, brakes, steering — work in harmony with a common level of effort. The SRX doesn’t have that, and the left pedal down in the footwell is the standout. It requires a ton of effort for not much result, and actually the more one pushes on the brake the more it feels like it is pushing back. This odd trait starts feeling normal after a few days of driving, but the Volvo feels natural on the first squeeze of the pads.

Cadillac’s turbo truck is redeemed by its solid, impressive chassis. Ride is smooth and confident, but can be a touch jittery over sharp bumps thanks to the big 20-inch wheels. Both of these crossovers have more of a feeling of heft than say, a BMW X3, but of the two the Volvo feels more energetic while the Cadillac has a more traditional luxury attitude. Though the slightly higher seating position of the Cadillac throws the senses a bit, it seems a bit more capable through curves than the Volvo.

So until this point, the battle is mainly a preferential affair. The Cadillac sacrifices a little more practicality in the name of style, though neither is especially spacious. It also boasts stronger technology, while the Volvo’s drivetrain is its strong point. Edges versus curves. Extrovert versus introvert. But where this comparison really turns in favor of the Volvo is when pricing is brought into consideration.



Though a basic front-drive SRX starts out at a very reasonable $33,830, the cheapest model with the turbocharged motor is a harder-to-swallow $49,315. The Volvo XC60 T6 starts at $37,200, meaning it, all of a sudden, seems like the deal of a lifetime. Sure, the Cadillac comes with more standard features including 20-inch wheels, navigation, HID headlamps, and the Bose audio, but those aren’t $12,000 worth of upgrades. As tested, our Volvo includes four heated seats (rear heated seats aren’t available with the Caddy), a multimedia package with navigation, the Dynaudio, and a rear camera, metallic paint, and a laminated panoramic roof. It still costs just $42,250 and really only lacks the big wheels and better headlights of the Cadillac, which in our form costs just over $52,000 if we ignore the rear seat entertainment system (another $1300). That’s the same price as an even higher-spec Volvo XC60 R-Design with every single box checked.

It’s normal for even a serious brand loyalist to be tempted or at least intrigued by some other products out there. The new Cadillac SRX has some serious potential, especially with the Swedish bits hiding here and there below the surface. And it is a very solid competitor. But with the downsides of the 2.8-liter V6 and the six-speed transmission it’s packing, along with the high price of entry, we’re all of a sudden loving the XC60 more than ever.