Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Steve - SanJose
F5, you are wrong about me. Got that? Got milk? And I would not complain about a bit more power.
And I agree with Sewie's comments:
"I don't think the mileage was as much an issue in choosing the I5 as the fact that it was already available. Why plonk all the money into R&D when you already have an engine that is capable enough and that you can drop right in."
"Now that the H3 is released and successful, and enough people are complaining about power, it makes sense for GM to look at other options."
And I agree with H3 Builder's comments:
"When you talk about any vehicle you always hear the same thing, "IT NEEDS MORE POWER". Now I agree that extra power is always better, but GM had to make a choice and went with the same power plant as the Colorado engine. If you noticed, GM has been bringing new products to market at a reasonable price. If you start adding this and that, it can bring the price up. If GM thinks there is a market and sell plenty of product to be worth while, then the buisness case is made, then things happen."
"It does not need a v-8. I heard the same thing all the time selling. power, power, power. well then why do so many bitch about MPG.?"
|
I understand the gist of what you're saying but, and this is a butt as big as Jay-Lo's, it IS true. The H3 does need more power. For any other time that it's being used other than on the trail, it's considered anemic. When I drive our Denali to work for a few days, then jump in the H3, I feel like I'm flogging a tired old mule. No more passing, no more hurrying, it just takes longer to get home even. It takes the joy out of driving on the road, and that's DAMNED important. What's important too is that it's not a comfortable feeling to know that instead of using an engine at 60% of it's power range, I'm nearing 100% quite frequently. An engine that's utilized at more of it's load rating is going to fail sooner, and that's the truth of it.
Adequate just doesn't cut it when you're in the auto business. What's needed is to pound the everlovin' krap out of the competition. Hell, our Denali only gets two mpg less than the H3. How many of you'd give up the 2mpg for all that power? All that driveability? I know I would!
Look at what happened to the SSR. I understand that it's a different application as well but the point is this: It was heavy, and underpowered when it was introduced with the krappy 5.3 and people hated it, sound familiar? We've had Yukons back to back, one with the 5.3, then the Denali with the 6.0. It was the same thing, the enjoyment of one over the other is truly an important factor. What doesn't seem like much on paper, made a huge difference in how we feel about the vehicle.
Hummer did indeed think out of the box on many issues with the H3, but on some of them, they're firmly planted IN the box like a snitch gangster's feet in concrete. The weak front end is one, and the engine's another. To beat the competition, they have to offer better. A stronger front end, and the 6.0 would be, gasp, innovative, and would bruise the competition badly. A V6 Dmax would be even better than that.
So the H3 Alpha gets a few inches longer. It gets a mile or two less per mpg. It'll need an HD frontend. You'd have to pay a few more thousand. Wanna bet me how many people on this forum woud jump TOMORROW if it were to come out with the 6.0 or V6 Dmax!?!