I think the I5 is fine. Somebody mentioned this is model year 2005 (not model year 1995.). While that may be true, I think the Auto Manufacturers all have their head up their asses right now and maybe the I5 is the step in the right direction.

What people don't understand is the majority of people that buy these vehicles want the best fuel mileage possible, with just enough power to get the job done. If GM comes out with the base models having a 6.0 LS2 then they are going to seal their fate. Hell, we've pulled loaded wagons of corn with less hp/tq then this I5 engine has. It will be fine.

GM be wary, all it will take is for Honda and Toyota to come out with a vehicle that gets great gas mileage; granted may not be able to do a 1/4mi in 9.8 seconds (its a truck for crying out loud) but it will have /enough/ power to get the job done. And the FUTURE is FUEL ECONOMY - NOT the Horsepower King.

I somewhat agree GM should get off the V8 bandwagon and work with more V6's and 4cyls. This is one lesson we should learn from the Foreign Auto Manufacturers. V8's are nice and I love them. But they are not needed in 99% of the vehicles that we have them in today...

 

Really? You actually think GM needs to make these things with a base 4 cyl.?

 

I don't think GM should abandon its HO V8s but it is focusing more on better gas mileage. With DOD on its 5.3 you get V6 mileage with a V8.

 

I don't think they should abandone HO V8's either, but again: BASE MODEL.

With DoD in a V6 you could have insane gas mileage and still enough power.

 

In my own personal opinion I think it should. I took it out of hte post as most people think thats a bit extreme.

A Ecotec 4cy in a 2wd Manual std cab fleet truck would be ok in my opinion. (Unless your pulling which most are not). But for a fuel effecient daily commuter with a FULL SIZE bed - I think the 4cyl would be an excellent choice. But again, you have to realize we're on a power hungry biased Camaro board too, LOL.

EDIT: What would be even better would be a 4cyl DIESEL engine. Then you could get torque output without sacrificing fuel economy. But GM decided to only bring the Duramax over here. BLAH

 

Rumor has the GMT355's getting a V8 or Turbo I5 for 2007. I hear rumors of mules of both running around.

I take it you havn't driven a 3.5L Colorado

220HP DOHC 3.5L I5 > 190HP 4.3L V6

I've driven many Blazers and trucks with the 4.3L and the Colorados 3.5L is a much stronger engine. It has a great torque curve and 90% of it's torque is avalible through out the RPM range. I very rarely need to have the tach above 3000rpm.

 

I don't know about the Ecotec, but the 2.8L Atlas 4 cyl. would be enough power form most 2WD work trucks.

3.0L Diesel 4cyl. would kick butt

 

I think the sadest part is thats how much my power my 99 v6 camaro puts out. 6 years later and they are still using with so little power (for what it's in) It's a damn Hummer who would put an I5 in a Hummer.

 

A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z

Study it.

 

Here's Autoweeks write up:

http://autoweek.com/article.cms?articleId=102423

It sounds like they really like the H3. They mention the power issue, but aren't making a super-huge issue out of it.

 

I'm sure they wouldn't figure it out. It's too similar to the word "Incentive" and they already have that one covered!

 

Yes, an overall positive review. Thanks for posting; I hadn't seen it yet.

One thing I found odd was that they preferred the auto over the manual. I've driven both many times (not off road), and I preferred the extra gear and controllability of the manual. When the six speed autos become more widespread, that might change for me.

But it sounds like the Autoweek guy had a similar overall opinion of the vehicle to my own.

As for the power, a 0-60 time of around 10 seconds is pretty slow, sure. However, it is right on top of the 325 hp (but 6000 lb) H2. The writer mentioned having to "plan ahead" when making passes or merging with traffic. Well, you ought to do that in any vehicle! Besides, it was not long ago at all when minivans were in the 9 to 10 second 0-60 range. Now they are mostly in the 8 - 9 second range (creeping up to 4500 lbs themselves, but carrying ~250 hp). Empty, that is.

Again, as I said in my earlier post, the I5 is fine for the base engine in the H3. I just feel that a small block should be made optional. Not because the vehicle is undriveable or unsafe as it is, but mainly because the competition offers 260-270 hp V6s and V8s, or the 325 hp "hemi" in the Grand Cherokee. The Hummer is in that price category, and it ought to offer what the competition offers in the engine department (it already stands out, big time, in the styling and off road capability department).

 

My question is: What happens when you get 3 or 4 people in there, with all their stuff, turn on the A/C, and then encounter a 25 mph headwind, and perhaps a hill or two. That's when it becomes foot to floor to maintain 60 mph.
Perhaps I'm missing something, but I thought the Hummer marque was about more than just "adequate."

 

it's true you "got to plan ahead when makng passes in any vehicle" but for the price I'm paying for the H3, I WANT to be able to pass comfortably (think merging with freeway traffic, think trying to pass a very slow vehicle in front and having to accelerate quickly to pass so you dont get in the way of another vehicle coming up on the left). I don't think the high HP (like 260, 325, etc) is necessary but certainly higher TQ would be mandatory, and you don't get the higher TQ from less cylinders and smaller engines. Even though my Grand Cherokee only has 235HP, it has 295ft-lbs of TQ, and I find it quite exhilarating to accelerate from stop and it has plenty of oooommpphh to accelerate at freeway speeds. I don't accelerate to 90mph or more, so higher HP is not as critical for my needs as having higher TQ. I do agree with you that it should compete with what's available, and in that price range, I'm going to be cross-shopping the other SUVs with V8's. Agree too that H3 has nice bold designs that I would go for, but due to the lack of an optional engine providing sufficient TQ, I would not consider trading in my GC for the H3.

 

300 hp 5.3 dod should be standard. Alpha should be the LS2. 225 tq is not going to cut it.