A) anyone paying this much for a truck can afford the gas
B) The FJ is one of the ugliest SUVs on the market and the panel fits are terrible.
C) The FJ and Xterra are stripped down entry level SUVs and the H3 is not- that's one reason it costs more. I cant see the point of any of them.
D) Anyone who test drives the Hummer knows about the small windows. Same applies to 300/Charger, MB CLS and many other vehicles today that have the high beltline/small window look.
E) LAst time I checked the FJ has a V6 with about 60 less hp than the H3, that could be one reason for the mileage difference.

The H2, H3 and H"pickup" are more about look and image than practicality.
 
Give me a 6spd, Off Road edition Xterra.

I think it might have been done somewhere, but I'd like to see how the off-road capabilities stack up in a comparison test. I'm not sure many people buy hummers to genuinely use them for off-roading, but the inspiration to all hummers, the military HUMVEE is an absolute beast when it comes to off-roading. I'm curious how much of that beast lives on in this tamed vehicles now known for being blinged out rather than rock crawling.
 
I remember the days when consumer Hummers were just stripped down versions of the military vehicle. There wasn't any bling, there wasn't any creature comforts on the inside. It was by far one of the more unique and flat out rugged vehicles you could find. This softening of the brand and turning into a luxury thing has really kind of ruined it for me. I miss the old school hummers when they first started selling them.
 
Anyway. I agree with some of whats been said. You buy a Hummer for the image, and because you have a huge disposable income. If you buy it for off-roading? I'd like to see how well it fares at that.

Karl, there are very few people that will take their hummers to the dirt road less offroading. Like they mention above is more for looks and if you can afford the gas on it.
 
Last time I read the comparo on 4 wheel drive magazine they mention some other bad issues with the H-3 Alpha base on true off roaders point of view.

I personaly love the H2. I love it's butch styling, it's image... I even like the macho gear lever that prominently juts out of the center console. But under no cirqumstances would i buy one.

I actually can talk about the H3 because my father leased one at the end of November and I've spent the past couple weeks riding in and driving it. It's the base H3 with the four-speed automatic transmission. I have to say that I was pleasantly surprised by the vehicle when I first drove it, as the urban ride was much smoother than I had anticipated. The highway ride is a bit bouncier than I'd like, though. The small turning circle (better than my Altima's) makes maneuvering almost easy, if that's possible with a 4700 pound SUV. I was even pleased with the interior, as at first glance the layout and design are both functional and reasonably attractive. The steering wheel is incredibly thick and meaty and the stereo sounds good. Once you start touching anything, however, you realize that the materials aren't "upscale" as Hummer likes to present itself. That said, I actually prefer the cloth seating surfaces in it to any other I've encountered. To me, the cheapish materials on the inside don't matter, because the H3 is supposed to be a rugged, off-road vehicle. Likewise the five-cylinder engine may not provide the most power or best acceleration, but in a vehicle this size, weight, and purpose, that doesn't bother me. I wouldn't want to try and race anyone in this thing or go sling it around some mountain curves at breakneck speeds; that's not its purpose. My complaints with the vehicle are: the MSRP, the conflicted advertising/nature (luxury or offroad?), the visibility (inexcusable to make the windows that small, as the design can be achieved using larger glass), the lack of fold-flat rear seats, the cruise control placement (move it to the steering wheel instead of that annoying stalk), the excess weight (several hundred pounds more than its peers), and the outdated transmission. The five-cylinder would achieve better mileage and acceleration with a modern automatic transmission of five or six speeds. As it stands, its gas mileage is close to that of its competitors like the Xterra, which gets 14/20 versus the H3's 14/18. The V8 Pathfinder achieves 12/18 versus the V8 H3's 13/16. It's not really a bad vehicle; it's just not worth $30,000, let alone 40+. The only reason my father got the thing is because he got a better lease deal from Hummer than anyone else: 320 a month with 2500 down, including ttl and down payment.
 
Also, Car and Driver did a comparison with the H3, Grand Cherokee, Xterra, and FJ. I'd link it but long links screw up this posting system. Just Google "H3 Xterra FJ".

if you want it I geuss.
 
IMHO, buying one is as crazy as buying a 23 year old ferrari

mcrunfast, as much as GM would like us to believe otherwise, there is absolutely nothing in common between the military HumVee/civillian H1 and GM's H2/H3. The H2 is a redone Tahoe, much improved for offroad, granted. I have never, ever seen an H2 or H3 with any dirt on it that would indicate it's been offroad.

A $40k H3 makes as much sense as.... say a $40k Impreza. Can you imagine if Subbie tried to charge that much for an Impreza? Opps, they already do.

texases - isn't the H2 built on the 2500 truck chassis?

rick-I'm remembering some of the initial articles on the H2, which referred to its Tahoe/Suburban roots. Of course, there's a 2500 Suburban, so maybe that was their starting point. It would be the previous gen, not the current gen, I don't think the H2 has had any major revisions.

rick8365,
The 2008 H2, Silverado, and the sierra all ride on the GMT 900 platform(frame).
the 2007 H2 sits on the older GMT 800 (silverado classic) frame. The 900 has a better ride, turning radious, stiffer frame, and built to host GM's 2 mode hybrid. GM was a year behind converting the H2 over to the newer frame. I'd like to take a ride in a 2008 and see if it makes as much difference as it did in the silverado.
2500 & 3500 are identical frames. The differences are in the suspension (leaf springs).

I agree with chavis: if an STI is worth almost $40k, the H3 is worth $42k. Neither is meant to be rational......the STI is for speed freaks and the H3 is either for serious off-roaders and/or people who want a patriotic/macho image.
 
I don't think the H3's fuel economy, performance or even price are the problem. As it's been pointed out, the fuel economy is competitive in the class. And serious offroaders are never about speed or even practicality.......in fact, I hear smaller engines are more suited for off-roader (eg, the old Land Rover 4 cylinders). Hummers in particular were not about performance, practicality or refinement! (There's no point in a refined Hummer, anyway!)
 
The H3's problem is IMAGE. While all SUVs are not economical, the Hummer in particular got badly cirticised. Driving a Hummer (or H2/H3) these days is seen as social irresponsibility and is no longer cool! The Hummer no longer gets the (positive) attention it did 10 or even 5 years ago and that's the real problem.

I like Hummers (and frankly dont care about the social responsibility part or all the tree huggers who hate it) but they are pricing themselves out of their own league. Like some have mentioned, you could get an Xterra, FJ Cruiser, Wrangler or even a used Land Cruiser for less money.
 
I also dont think the STi commands $40K either, like what the hell were they thinking.

Chevy, you sure they changed? All dimensions are identical, no changes anywhere, unlike what the Tahoe, etc. went through. Here's what Wiki has to say, it mentions nothing about a change:
Although it shares GM's GMT820 truck platform with the Chevrolet Tahoe and GMC Yukon, those vehicles differ in many ways and are constructed in three other GM plants. The H2's final frame assembly is made up of 3 sections: The front uses a modified GM 2500-Series utility frame, the mid-section is all new and is completely boxed, and the rear section uses a modified GM 1500-Series frame which is upgraded for the 8,600 pound (3629 kg) gross vehicle weight.

a diesel H3 makes more sense. I honestly hope that there would be a diesel h2 before a hybrid... A 220hp 395lbs ft turbodiesel v6 engine sounds good for an h3. I'd guess at 19/26. much better than the alpha...
 
-Cj

Thanks for the clarification, texases & chevy.
 
The H2 has decent credentials but when I factor in that it shares its name with the H1 it seems more like a knock off than something worthy of the name.

Hi Orangutan, I just read the C&D comparison tests and another one by World of Wheels mag. Both tested the 5-cyl version, both agreed that the H3 is considerably better than the competition (FJ, Grand Cherokee, Xterra) in off-road use.
 
Which brings me back to the point that the H3's problem is image, and perhaps the fact that we're used to the styling now so it no longer gets too much attention.
 
To say the H3 is a gas guzzler, has poor refinement, poor visibility, is slow, expensive or offers little practicality is missing the point completely. Hummers sold because of they were seen as fashionable or attention-getting rich men's toys with serious, near-military off-road prowess. Hence, they were not cheap/affordable. (An affordable/cheap Hummer would be meaningless because it would lose the social cachet..... Similarly, I think a Hummer with a luxurious or "high quality" interior is meaningless because it goes against that toughness image...military vehicles are not supposed to have great interiors. The rich guys who used to buy the Hummer didn't buy it for luxury.)
 
The real reason the H3 is is failing to sell well is because the Hummer just doesn't have that great image anymore. (All the rap songs these days talk about Escalades!!!!) Without the Hummer's image to propel it, people who can otherwise afford the H3 now see it as an expensive vehicle with little practical use and little comfort/luxury....with styling that no longer has that shock factor.

A diesel will be coming to Hummer in 2009. Not sure if the H3 will get it though.
 
Hummer's are overkill but so are all other expensive SUVs with great off roading ability. The toureg is heavy and gets terrrible mileage because VW gave it rock climbing capability it doesnt need. Same for the Cayenne and Land Cruiser/LX570. Its all silly when you think about how these vehicles are used and yet the press only has a problem with Hummers.

I completely agree with Karl's assesment.
 
The H3 has poor quality, poor interior, poor power, poor mpgs, lacks technology (who else has LEAF springs on a SUV? Over $30,000 and they can't throw some coils and control arms in there?, lacks visibility (hello, isn't this suppossed to be a trail vehicle?), but the low roof makes the cargo room fairly impractical so that's a bonus... and carries the stench of the H2... so you might as well wax it with "hate magnet" because that's what it gets from everyone.
 
Vehicles like the LX570 and Touereg actually have redeeming qualities...