V8 H3 Alpha

[Sewie]

Originally Posted by Steve - SanJose

When GM picked the I5 for the H3, mileage was a big consideration.

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.

[PARAGON]

Originally Posted by Sewie

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.

agreed....

had nothing to do with the fact that it was already in the colo/canyon

[H3 Builder]

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.

[usetosellhummer]

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'm sick of it. hay if you don't like the I-5 then don't buy the damn truck
I love it.

[f5fstop]

Originally Posted by H3 Builder

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.

I agree, but there is one on this thread who likes to think he knows, but has not idea what he is talking about...got that Steve.


I have a feeling if the V8 does come, he will complain about how it is priced and packaged.

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.?"

[Huck BB62]

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!?!

[RuggedH2]

I would. Tomorrow. Be damn happy to.

[CLAYDOG]

Originally Posted by Huck BB62

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!?!

Sounds like your talkin' about a H2

If you look at the numbers comparing a I6 Envoy to a V8 Envoy Denali, mpg is almost identical.

[Huck BB62]

Yeah, that'd work how? Just how many ways to blow up other parts. It needs to be part of a package otherwise it'd make as much sense as bolting a JATO rocket on the roof.

[H3.007]

I just looked at the specs for a 2007 Yukon. Isn't that a heavier vehicle than the H3? If so, it is getting comparable gas mileage with a V8 and obviously more horses....

And would such a comparison be stupid?

If only the real world gas mileage of the Yukon was even close to the EPA mpg numbers. Everything I've seen so far indicates mileage around 12mpg.

[JAYB1RD]

What's wrong with the H3 drivetrain behind a V8? The rear axle is just a narrowed version of the 1/2ton pickup 10 bolt. The 4L60E trans. is what goes in the same trucks behind many 5.3L and 5.L7 V8s from the factory. The transfer case I admitedly don't know much about, but it looks VERY similar to the auto-trac transfercase which is also found in many fullsize 4WD GM trucks. That leaves the front axle as (IMO) the only part that isn't up to V8 power standards. Now, GM used to make a cast iron version of the mid-size IFS axle (I think it was the ZR2 S10), so I would venture to guess the H3 Alpha would have this as well.

In short, an H3 Alpha only needs a 5.3L V8 and a cast iron, locking, front diff in addition to the currrent H3 Adventure components to be a reality. If they want to throw in a body lift to clear the engine some more and maybe fit 35s, all the better

[blindzebra]

I agree a 1 inch body lift with 35s would be my ideal H3. I love the articulation and that wouldn't change it abit. I would also say the alpha should come with the HPN shocks. All that and above, Good lord that would be one incredible stock vehicle.