I bought a 2004 V6 AWD brand new and I still own it. Now it is semi retired and is mainly used as a "DOG PARK TAXI" or as a extra vehicle. It has 286k miles on the original engine and transmission and the only thing that doesn't work is the rear washer jet. Only things that have been replaced outside of routine maintenance items has been the MAF sensor valve cover gaskets and brake master cylinder. It has never failed to start or left anyone stranded.
Wonderful! Thank you! I wonder if they did an 04 update for the CTS when it got the 3.6. Always really loved these SRX’s, especially the original 2004-2006. The facelift is ok but the original is my favorite. 4:44 - the mention of no lumbar. This was an early 04 made in 2003 when the CTS also didn’t have lumbar. 2004 CTS’s along with later 04 SRX’s do have lumbar. But if it is a loaded up 2004 SRX without lumbar, it is definitely an early 2003 production.
@@RetroCarReviews my rule is never drive anything from the 21st century because i hate all the tech shit and boring blobular design aesthetic. There's only two cars i make an exception for: 2004-2006 SRX in triple black V8 RWD and the 2000 DeVille. Not 2000-2005, because after 2001 they started putting the fugly "sleek" bootleg looking ass wreath & crest on them. And not the DTS package because it needs to have the footwell space/ pseudo bench seat which the console shifter eliminates. And even then, they're all utility to me. From someone like me where my cars are a form of communication, that's about as cold as you can get. I'd be more excited to drive a literal utility vehicle like a GMC van or Chevy Viking than these. And i'd have a lot more fun, too. I'll always daily classic Cadillacs.
I bought a 2004 V6 AWD brand new and I still own it.
Now it is semi retired and is mainly used as a "DOG PARK TAXI" or as a extra vehicle.
It has 286k miles on the original engine and transmission and the only thing that doesn't work is the rear washer jet.
Only things that have been replaced outside of routine maintenance items has been the MAF sensor valve cover gaskets and brake master cylinder.
It has never failed to start or left anyone stranded.
Wonderful! Thank you! I wonder if they did an 04 update for the CTS when it got the 3.6. Always really loved these SRX’s, especially the original 2004-2006. The facelift is ok but the original is my favorite.
4:44 - the mention of no lumbar. This was an early 04 made in 2003 when the CTS also didn’t have lumbar. 2004 CTS’s along with later 04 SRX’s do have lumbar. But if it is a loaded up 2004 SRX without lumbar, it is definitely an early 2003 production.
The transfercase can be converted to All wheel Drive 60/40 Split. (without buying any parts) I would probably do this if i was set on 100% Dirt roads
I like these. Kinda want an early year (2004-06) with a V8 in triple black
AGREED...
@@RetroCarReviews my rule is never drive anything from the 21st century because i hate all the tech shit and boring blobular design aesthetic. There's only two cars i make an exception for: 2004-2006 SRX in triple black V8 RWD and the 2000 DeVille. Not 2000-2005, because after 2001 they started putting the fugly "sleek" bootleg looking ass wreath & crest on them. And not the DTS package because it needs to have the footwell space/ pseudo bench seat which the console shifter eliminates.
And even then, they're all utility to me. From someone like me where my cars are a form of communication, that's about as cold as you can get. I'd be more excited to drive a literal utility vehicle like a GMC van or Chevy Viking than these. And i'd have a lot more fun, too.
I'll always daily classic Cadillacs.
@@RetroCarReviews Very beautiful the Cadillac SRX
An SUV that still holds up great today. Here's a modern review of the Caddy SRX: th-cam.com/video/5j3_0scz-2Q/w-d-xo.html
Can you do the 2005 and a 1/2 Silverado 2500 and the 2003 GMC U con denali and Sierra
GET IN LINE, LOL...
It was always ugly to me
Sadly propaganda tool rather than true review
Yuck. Looks like a fancier Ford Freestyle. The next generation SRX was much better.
Funny because I think the opposite
@@samuelsabo9493exactly right for me
Lexus
Quite.
Do they ever mention anything bad about cars in their reviews? Seems they are more of a propaganda tool than anything else...
Yikes that's an ugly looking car! Was it designed by accountants?
Very nice this Caddy