It's now official. The Hummer H3 is just as slow and gasoline loving as I'd predicted. I was particularly stunned by the 199ft 70-0 braking distance, though.

Fortunately, H3 won't be outperformed by every vehicle on the highway. I'm very confident that the H3 can match or beat the straight line performance of the Scion xB.

If you want to read more, pick up the August 2005 issue of Car and Driver.

 

The manual should do 0 to 60 faster then that. Its not that slow or thirsty compared to the other trucks in the hummer line up. Even the new buff diesel h1 takes well over 10 seconds to 60 and costs 3 times as much.

 

I'll be openly critical of the choice of the I5 in the H3. I don't consider the I5 to be a good base engine in an upper-scale brand like Hummer, and this is all we can get for now? Not good. Maybe GM can get it right the 2nd time around, in a couple of years when the screams for more mustard under the hood are too loud to ignore.

 

I think the vast majority of this forum have already expressed disappointment in the engine choice for the H3... not sure what this post is supposed to accomplish.

Regardless, it looks like the H3 has gotten off to a nice start sales-wise.

 

Any hearsay on whether GM will add another engine to the lineup? It's begging for 3.9L HV V6.

 

Yet GM will have no problem selling them...

 

Why should they? The hummer crowd is not all about speed. We are talking about a company that sells 3 of the biggest, slowest, most expensive mass production vehicles on the road. If their clientele cared about that, they would not be buying hummer.

 

Which is exactly my point. Why point out it is slow and gets poor gas mileage (thread topic). Those details are irrelevant.

Thanks, though.

 

10.2? Another had it at just over 11 seconds!
Does Jeep even make anything that slow?

0-60 times may not seem like a big deal in an off road vehicle, but since 0-60 is an exercise in torque more than horsepower, it still is relevent.

I think comparing lbs/ft of torque per pound, the H3 is going to come up short.

It's a shame too because I think otherwise I think it's pretty awesome.

 

[QUOTE=Darth Xed]... not sure what this post is supposed to accomplish.

QUOTE]


Once again trying to rile everyone up...

 

Why is there anything short of a V8 in a Hummer?
I bet it would've gotten better mileage in a V8, too. I can imagine the I-5 working too hard.

 

Its times and mileage are very close to the heavier h2 with a v8.

 

With real people driving I'd expect 18-20mpg.

10.2 is not great, but avg. for most SUVs and vans

 

Don't think so. My cherokee did that in around 8.4-8.6 seconds. The newer liberty is probably around there as well. Well maybe the new diesel liberty might be. The base fullsized Commander with the 3.7L base engine might be as slow too with 0-60's in the 10 second range.

Let's face it, very few vehicles today do 0-60 in the sub-11 second range. Even SUV's have gotten quicker. Today, you've got midsizers like the Highlander hybrid doing 0-60 in 6.6 seconds and full size Armada's doing it 7.1 seconds.

The H3 deserved nothing short of the 5.3.

 

I'm waiting to see if they make an H4 with a 502 V8 and make it seaworthy. If I wanted a hummer, it would have to be the H1.