H3... mmmmm????

[BuddyP]

Since it's dayview, I haven't thought too much of this vehicle. After reading about it in the latest M/T mag I not anymore of a fan than before. What was GM thinking when designing this vehicle? Why the I-5 for one? Why isn't it just based off the Trailblazer with the 4.2? 14cty/19hwy is hardly good milage for a low output I-5 so using that motor for milage is no excuse. It's off road capability's rated well but that's where it stopped. It's slow, underpowered, can only tow 4500lbs for the price of a full size truck or decently equipped Avalanche. $30k base and $38k loaded!

[Croc]

It is off the GMT-355 because of better off-roading characteristics inherent to that platform. Engine upgrade coming in a year. Selling like hotcakes, so what exactly did GM do wrong?

[AAS]

It is off the GMT-355 because of better off-roading characteristics inherent to that platform.  Engine upgrade coming in a year.  Selling like hotcakes, so what exactly did GM do wrong?

[post="38576"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Croc, you are asking the wrong question... I read the MT write-up, and what you should be asking is: "Why let MT convince you that GM did something wrong?"

[Croc]

Fair enough...I don't read Motor Trash anyway...but as far as I'm concerned, great sales + upping production = SUCCESSFUL PRODUCT ...despite what any magazine tells you

[AAS]

Fair enough...I don't read Motor Trash anyway...but as far as I'm concerned, great sales + upping production = SUCCESSFUL PRODUCT

...despite what any magazine tells you

[post="38589"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Amen!

If you ever get around to reading the MT review... it just seems like they tried very very hard to bash the H3 any which way they could. Edited November 4, 2005 by AAS

[BuddyP]

Motor Trend didn't make me think any different of it or sway my opinion, I just saw the article and it got me thinking what my personal thoughts were of it back when it first came out. My main thought was "Why the I-5". I'm glad they are selling, They are neat vehicles, just useless other than driving to the grocery store. Admit it... they are underpowered. But yes I know motor options are on their way. The TB platform could easily be made into a better offroad platform. Just like the suburban platform did for the H2. Then it'd have the tow rating and power, and be priced still close to where it is now. Edited November 4, 2005 by BuddyP

[haypops]

It seems to me that the I-5 would be advantageous for oof roading due to lower weight, better center of gravity, and 220 hp is already too much for the traction conditions available.

[mystik]

Why doesnt the Jeep Wrangler get terrible reviews? lol. This is what's amusing to me about General Motors vehicles. They aren't praised for what they do well, and an H3 does A LOT of things well (nice roomy interior, great looks, comfy seats, insane offroading abilities) but what do people look at first? I-5 I-5 I-5. The Wrangler rides worse, looks worse, worse interior, and does anyone care? Nope. Only when GM comes out with a car like the H3 do people nitpick every little thing. I too read that review, and I just laugh. The I-5 was implimented to make the approach angle larger, thus making it able to climb over various terrain. It's selling plenty more than their so called SUV of the year, so while Motor Trend is trying desperately to get H3 buyers to get an Xterra, GM is selling more and more each day. Yeah, GM REALLY needs to fix that pathetic vehicle.

[CaddyXLR-V]

Wheres the complaints about the H1 only getting 195hp, and a 0-60 time of 11 seconds? Are Hummers made to race, or go offroading?

[Variance]

It's selling plenty more than their so called SUV of the year, so while Motor Trend is trying desperately to get H3 buyers to get an Xterra, GM is selling more and more each day.

[post="38626"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Actually the H3 doesn't outsell the Xterra:

October:

Xterra: 5,271
H3: 4,461

September:

Xterra: 5,090
H3: 4,054

August:

Xterra: 5,277
H3: 4,772

[BuddyP]

Wheres the complaints about the H1 only getting 195hp, and a 0-60 time of 11 seconds? Are Hummers made to race, or go offroading?

[post="38632"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

2 completely different vehicles, besides, the H1 is a Deisel, 195hp is not bad for a Deisel. It's all torque there. All my point is, for milage, price and towing ability the 4.2 could be in there. Great vehicle other than that.

[haypops]

local hummer dealer claims 275 H3s in stock!!

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

If you ever get around to reading the MT review... it just seems like they tried very very hard to bash the H3 any which way they could.

Of course they did!!!

It commited the 2 cardinal sins. 1) It's a GM product that's actually selling and 2) It's a "gas guzzling HUMMER suv"

Anytime a GM vehicle actually sells, the media will try to STOP the momentum; add to that the liberal BS that is rampant throughout our media and there you have #2

And besides... How many H3 owners do you actually think are going to tow something with this truck??? How many of them CARE to be seen in a "common" Chevrolet Avalanche eventhough it is twice the truck for the money?

It's funny all of these comparisons come to fruition when domestics are concerned, but aren't mentioned on something like an ES to Camry situation or an ES to Avalon situation...

More media bullsh*t.

[sciguy_0504]

I thought the MT SUOTY article made a good statement:

The H3's city/highway rating of 16/19 is optimistic at best, and the pain at the gas pump is intensified by a 0-to-60 sprint that took over 11 seconds.  The Hummer may be slow, but it sure is thirsty.  In fact, it almost justifies buying the larger, marginally less fuel efficient H2 with its whopping 6.0-liter V-8, which can at least outrun hybrid-driving environmentalists.

[5.3Avalanche]

The H3 is a great truck! Hope to pick one up after I get rid of my avalanche.

[haypops]

The H3's city/highway rating of 16/19 is optimistic at best, and the pain at the gas pump is intensified by a 0-to-60 sprint that took over 11 seconds

I wonder if the comment about the gas milage rating being optimistic is true at all. These engines have a lot in common with the ecotec engine family (DOHC, loss foam casting techniques, etc.) and many, many owners of Saturn cars using those engine report significant improvements in gas milage after 5000 miles or more.

[BuddyP]

The H3 is a great truck!  Hope to pick one up after I get rid of my avalanche.

[post="39371"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Funny you say that, I just bought a Avalanche. But I pull a trailer frequently too.

[mystik]

Whoop, didnt read those numbers right. The Xterra has been outselling the H3. Apologies. After reading the H3 "Review" over and over again, the article suffers from bias, much like the Solstice and GTO articles a few pages ahead of it. Sad. There is a paragraph that takes up 2/3 of the write-up that focuses on how much the I5 sucks. Then 1/3 on the stuff that matters. It ends on a "Its mostly a marketing exercise you wouldn't want to drive every day." Wtf? What would happen if the H3 had athe 5.3 and averaged 19/25? The Solstice article made me sick to my core, the GTO article did as well. Why did I subscribe to 2 years of Motor Trend again?

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

They're just trying to gain credibility with the "In" crowd or a.k.a anti-Detroit crowd.

[ichbinjohnk]

Why is this HUMMER thread still under Chevy Trucks?