H3 V8 and Diesel for 2007

[TimJ]

This is exciting news!!!

http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/News/articleId=107776

[TimJ]

This is exciting news!!!

http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/News/articleId=107776

[xburbman]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by TimJ:
This is exciting news!!!

http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/News/articleId=107776 </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Thanks TImJ.
This is exciting news! Yeah, that's exactly what I was telling myself 2 months ago when I bought my H3..."just hold off a little longer and they'll put an engine with more HP in it" Sure enuf, here it is. Oh well, I'm very pleased with the performance of the I5 thusfar.

[DWPC]

Frankly, I'd rather have the I5 than that 5.7 (350) cast iron dinosaur. My father's Olds had that engine. GM really needs to take those 50-yr old push-rods out back and put 'em out of their misery.

[xburbman]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by DWPC:
Frankly, I'd rather have the I5 than that 5.7 (350) cast iron dinosaur. My father's Olds had that engine. GM really needs to take those 50-yr old push-rods out back and put 'em out of their misery. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Well, although, I'm not for sure, but I thought GM did..or is at least in the process of 'grandfathering' them. My Suburban ('99) had the 5.7 engine you're referring to. My neighbor got a 2000 YukonXL with a smaller engine(don't know which one) but it had more HP than the 5.7 He indicated to me that my '99 was the last year for that engine. Hmmmm?

[JeffW]

Found this summary of GM engines (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_GM_engines).

I would guess the new H3 engine would be something like the LH6. The old 5.7L referred to above is most likely the Gen II LT1, so this is 2 generations more advanced.

"LH6
An improved LH6 version with Displacement on Demand will push output even higher. It is a Generation IV small-block and features the improvements found on other Gen4 motors. An early batch of fifty 2005 Saab 9-7X SUVs for the Canada market used this engine with the Displacement on Demand feature disabled.

LH6 applications:

2005 Chevrolet TrailBlazer EXT/GMC Envoy XL SUVs
2005 GMC Envoy XUV
2005 Buick Rainier (without Displacement on Demand)
2005 Saab 9-7X
An automotive version of the 5300 V8 will also be offered in the Pontiac Grand Prix in 2005."

I looked up the Envoy specs. The V8 gets 300 hp and 330 lb ft of torque. It gets EPA mileage of 15/19, as opposed to 15/21 for it's V6.

[canucksnaphook]

300 hp eh? Well that sounds like one for me. But then there is the gas mileage difference cause you know it will be driven harder ...whats a guy to do????

C.

[f5fstop]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by DWPC:
Frankly, I'd rather have the I5 than that 5.7 (350) cast iron dinosaur. My father's Olds had that engine. GM really needs to take those 50-yr old push-rods out back and put 'em out of their misery. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

The Hummer H3 will NOT have the 5.7L V8.

As for pushrod engines, yes, they are antiquated and cannot achieve much performance. I mean, just look at the LS2/LS7, only 400/505 HP (400 lb-ft/470 lb-ft torque) from those antiquated pushrod engines; damn, GM should be ashamed. (Cast iron is going out in many engines, but durability wise, it is still one of the best materials.)


Getting serious, pushrod engines tend to develop more low end torque, than overhead cam engines, in addition, if you have a very low profile front end (Corvette), pushrod is the way to go. OHC engines are lighter, create more RPM. OHV engines tend to float valves at a lower rpm due to valvetrain inertia, but that has not been a problem...let's not forget Penske winning the 500 with a pushrod engine, and the rest of the field was OHC engines.

OHC in an in-line engine tends to be less expensive, while in a V-block it tends to be a lot more expensive. In addition, displacement on demand is more expensive on OHC engines than on OHV engines. On OHV engines all you have to do is bleed oil pressure from the lifters using a simple solenoid controlled by the PCM. Displacement on demand on OHC engines requires more parts, thus more cost, which we know is pushed off on the customer.

This might be a bad comparison, but let's look at some figures:
GM pushrod engines:
4.8L-2V = 300 HP
6.0L-2V = 325 or 390 hp
Ford OHC engines:
5.4L-3V = 300 hp
6.8L-2V = 310 hp
6.9L-3V = 355 hp
There are applications for both, OHC and OHV engines. But to say OHV is antiquated, is funny. Especially since mass produced overhead cam engines have been around since 1912 (Fiat) and mass produced overhead valve engines were first produced in 1917 (Chevrolet). http://www.elcova.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

The 5.3L mentioned in the article is rated about 335 lb-ft or torque at or around 4000 rpm, with 295 hp. It is a two-valve, pushrod engine. (Corrected to pushrod, I was thinking about another 5.3L engine. http://www.elcova.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_confused.gif
There are currently two versions of the 5.3L the LM7 (truck) and the LS4 (car).

And yes, the 5.7L cast-iron dinosaur is gone.

[Donald Smith]

Fstop

Ok-the news seems to be out. What do you think,or know, will it be fall of 06 or further out.
Also, I am thinking the V8 with only the auto and if that is the case how mucho. I found that the option between the I6 and 5.3 in the trailblazer is $1000. Of course you can,t get a stick in it so what do you think $2800 for the 5.3 option?

[HummerNewbie]

Any guess on how far out this is. I am planning on getting mine in Dec or Jan and if it is only going to be 6 months and another $1K-$2K for a V8, I might be able to get myself to wait.

[Surferjo]

If I knew for sure that a V8 would be available next year I'll cancel my order today.

Talk about gas mileage and how the H3 is adequately powered all you want. Ill take a V8 without hesitation.

Tree Huggers be dammed. I support retail.

[BigBill]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Surferjo:
If I knew for sure that a V8 would be available next year I'll cancel my order today.

Talk about gas mileage and how the H3 is adequately powered all you want. Ill take a V8 without hesitation.

Tree Huggers be dammed. I support retail. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Exactly!

I just read the article and it is excellent news. I am probably dreaming too much and should wait and a. payoff my truck and b. save some $$, but it is always good to look! http://www.elcova.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Bill

[BigBill]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by f5fstop:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by DWPC:
Frankly, I'd rather have the I5 than that 5.7 (350) cast iron dinosaur. My father's Olds had that engine. GM really needs to take those 50-yr old push-rods out back and put 'em out of their misery. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

The Hummer H3 will NOT have the 5.7L V8.

As for pushrod engines, yes, they are antiquated and cannot achieve much performance. I mean, just look at the LS2/LS7, only 400/505 HP (400 lb-ft/470 lb-ft torque) from those antiquated pushrod engines; damn, GM should be ashamed. (Cast iron is going out in many engines, but durability wise, it is still one of the best materials.)


Getting serious, pushrod engines tend to develop more low end torque, than overhead cam engines, in addition, if you have a very low profile front end (Corvette), pushrod is the way to go. OHC engines are lighter, create more RPM. OHV engines tend to float valves at a lower rpm due to valvetrain inertia, but that has not been a problem...let's not forget Penske winning the 500 with a pushrod engine, and the rest of the field was OHC engines.

OHC in an in-line engine tends to be less expensive, while in a V-block it tends to be a lot more expensive. In addition, displacement on demand is more expensive on OHC engines than on OHV engines. On OHV engines all you have to do is bleed oil pressure from the lifters using a simple solenoid controlled by the PCM. Displacement on demand on OHC engines requires more parts, thus more cost, which we know is pushed off on the customer.

This might be a bad comparison, but let's look at some figures:
GM pushrod engines:
4.8L-2V = 300 HP
6.0L-2V = 325 or 390 hp
Ford OHC engines:
5.4L-3V = 300 hp
6.8L-2V = 310 hp
6.9L-3V = 355 hp
There are applications for both, OHC and OHV engines. But to say OHV is antiquated, is funny. Especially since mass produced overhead cam engines have been around since 1912 (Fiat) and mass produced overhead valve engines were first produced in 1917 (Chevrolet). http://www.elcova.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

The 5.3L mentioned in the article is rated about 335 lb-ft or torque at or around 4000 rpm, with 295 hp. It is a two-valve, overhead cam engine.
There are currently two versions of the 5.3L the LM7 (truck) and the LS4 (car).

And yes, the 5.7L cast-iron dinosaur is gone. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Since we are on the subject of this latest GM endeavor, the 2nd generation of the Displacement on Demand cylinder valve functionality is based on hydraulics, thus a quality oil viscosity should be used. Why would GM rely on oil as opposed to exhaust for this functionality? I would think that exhaust would be more reliable. If I am not mistaken, much of the diesel engine works on combustion and exhaust. http://www.elcova.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Bill

[f5fstop]

Oil hydraulics are used for valve variation as well as cylinder deactivation. Honda for one uses oil pressure for their variable valve timing. So, not sure why basing functionality on oil hydraulics is a bad idea. On really not sure when you say a "quality oil viscosity" should be used. Do you mean a thicker oil? If so, the thickness of the oil required is Dependant upon the viscosity require to move an object. (Did that make sense?)
As for when, I cannot say, but I will say in order to insert a V8 under the current hood, it can't be done. It will take some massive mods under the hood and that will not be done for '07, unless someone decides to poor in hundreds of million and I cannot see that happen. There is only so much money to go around.
I am not familiar with the diesel, but I believe it is an inline, so it might fit without major mods.
Also, for those who love V8s, even after massive mods, I would guess it will be a nightmare to work on, compared to the inline.
For me, I have a massive V8 under the hood of another vehicle I can drive during the summer months, and I do not desire anything more in the H3.
So, guys have fun with this thread.

[DDWH]

IMHO I would think with the sales being so brisk right now for the H3. That they will not throw money at it until it hits the cash cow cycle. I mean we are seeing these articles saying 07/08...I doubt it, I would think its going to be closer to 2010.

For now.....SUPERCHARGER http://www.elcova.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

[XM DUDE]

If this is true, you may see alot of used 5 cylinder H3's as people opt for the V8.

[CLAYDOG]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by DDWH:
IMHO I would think with the sales being so brisk right now for the H3. That they will not throw money at it until it hits the cash cow cycle. I mean we are seeing these articles saying 07/08...I doubt it, I would think its going to be closer to 2010.

For now.....SUPERCHARGER http://www.elcova.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

It has more to do with the Colorado/Canyon competing with the Dakota.

[BigBill]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by DDWH:
IMHO I would think with the sales being so brisk right now for the H3. That they will not throw money at it until it hits the cash cow cycle. I mean we are seeing these articles saying 07/08...I doubt it, I would think its going to be closer to 2010.

For now.....SUPERCHARGER http://www.elcova.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I completely understand but the number one "negative" in everyone's minds, ours and the reviewers, is that the H3 has power issues; GM and Hummer cannot ignore that for long.

Plus, the new Dodge Durango has this new displacement engine in it; the new Explorer has it, so I think it could, and should come to a competition battle. From my understanding, the H3 was built to compete with these other models. If they add a beefier enginer, I would bet the sales would go through the roof. The H3 is by far a better vehicle than those aforementioned vehicles.

I am shooting for my first Hummer in 2007.

Bill

[DDWH]

Okay okay, get out a big shoe horn and cram this baby in the H3...Problem solved for 14.5k and whatever mods ya need to fit it in VAROOOM VAROOOM http://www.elcova.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif
http://www.gmpartsdirect.com/part_images/ls7.jpg

[H3 Builder]

Most likely closer to 2008 for changes.

[f5fstop]

Actually, we had an LS7 that we just pulled out of a ZO6, and hoovering it over the H3 on a hoist, it appears it might fit in the engine compartment, if you removed the generator. However, you would have to pull the engine to change plugs, install the dry oil sump reservoir on the right fender, radiator and engine fan in front of the grill. Nice part of the LS7 is it has a small oil pan due to the dry sump system.

The engine upgrade will be in '07, the diesel, as H3 Builder says will be, most likly closer to '08 than first run '07 (if it does come to happen), and the V8 everyone is talking about will not be in '07.

[DDWH]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by f5fstop:
Actually, we had an LS7 that we just pulled out of a ZO6, and hoovering it over the H3 on a hoist, it appears it might fit in the engine compartment, if you removed the generator. However, you would have to pull the engine to change plugs, install the dry oil sump reservoir on the right fender, radiator and engine fan in front of the grill. Nice part of the LS7 is it has a small oil pan due to the dry sump system.

The engine upgrade will be in '07, the diesel, as H3 Builder says will be, most likly closer to '08 than first run '07 (if it does come to happen), and the V8 everyone is talking about will not be in '07. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Sure would look nice under the hood of a red or black HUMMER H3 SS http://www.elcova.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

My buddy has an older Ferrari and you have to yank the motor to do the plugs.

[Jersey Guy]

first chance i get i will trade my slow tank in for the 07 the I5 was good to me when i first bought it because i was so happy to get one but after 7000 miles and getting stuck on some off road hills that could have made it up no problem with more power this I5 is not! strong enough for this H3

[trebor]

Hey Jersey Guy do you have the off road package with the 4:1 transfer case. I have been offroad with mine and have had no problems with power issues.

[f5fstop]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Jersey Guy:
first chance i get i will trade my slow tank in for the 07 the I5 was good to me when i first bought it because i was so happy to get one but after 7000 miles and getting stuck on some off road hills that could have made it up no problem with more power this I5 is not! strong enough for this H3 </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Guess what, the '07 will also have an I5. I'm also curious, there is one guy on this forum who went all the way to Alaska and had no problems. Honestly do not believe the extra HP in the '07 will help all who think the current I5 is too slow.
These things have been tested offroad at Windrock and the Moab area and go with no problems.

[timgco]

The I5 has pleanty of power to off road with! ...even at 12,000ft! For someone to say "and getting stuck on some off road hills that could have made it up no problem with more power this I5 is not! strong enough for this H3" sounds like they don't know how to off road! I have had this H3 on hills that are straight up and down, on hard packed and loose rock, boulder fields and yes mud and have not needed more power to make it through. I would like some MT's to help out in that mud dept, and yes I would like another 100hp, but it is not needed. The kind of person that "NEEDS" more power to make it through something or get stuck, more than likely "needs" to learn more on how to handle their truck.

[f5fstop]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by timgco:
The I5 has pleanty of power to off road with! ...even at 12,000ft! For someone to say "and getting stuck on some off road hills that could have made it up no problem with more power this I5 is not! strong enough for this H3" sounds like they don't know how to off road! I have had this H3 on hills that are straight up and down, on hard packed and loose rock, boulder fields and yes mud and have not needed more power to make it through. I would like some MT's to help out in that mud dept, and yes I would like another 100hp, but it is not needed. The kind of person that "NEEDS" more power to make it through something or get stuck, more than likely "needs" to learn more on how to handle their truck. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Very well said...http://hometown.aol.com/f5fstop01/images/thumbsup.gif