The Creation, History and Development of the Hummer

Willys Overland Motors/Jeep

U.S. Army asked for a brand new vehicle in 1979, and AM General answered with a few prototype Humvees in the 1980s. Production began in 1985 for the military. Source: Full Throttle Hummer

Hummer engines and transmissions

Until the 1990s, Hummers were only powered by a 6.2 NA diesel V-8, the famed and larger 6.5 turbodiesel V-8 did not appear until around 1995.

-Power: 130 horsepower, 230 lb ft torque (6.2-liter). Weak Detroit diesel engine. Edmunds also suggests that some 1995-97 H1s were saddled with gasoline-fed 350-cubic inch 5.7-liter V-8 engines, borrowed from GM trucks. The smallest engine ever to be put into an H1, power for the gas V-8 was similar to other models but torque was not, rated at 190 hp, yet only 332 lb-ft for these models. It faded away after 1997 because of its low torque output and lack of diesel-supplied torque, which was a soldier-like 430 pound-feet for 6.5 TD H1s. That is usually a good enough figure, but almost all H1s were taxed with excessive weight, and the 5.7-liter was scrapped from H1s after 1997.

H1 later received the famous 6.5-liter turbodiesel V-8 that would eventually rated for 195 hp and 430 pound feet of torque (edmunds.com)

Largest engine ever put in was 6.6-liter Chevrolet Silverado Duramax turbodiesel V-8 that was rated at a Hummer high of 300 hp and 520 lb-ft of torque. Also received Silverado’s Allison 1000 5-speed automatic. Dubbed H1 Alpha, only saw 1 year of production (2006). It was part of new Alpha line of Hummer trucks.

Additional engines for Hummer lineup: H2 received gas only engines, producing 316 from Silverado 2500’s 6.0-liter Vortec V-8. Later bumped slightly to 325, it still was underpowered for a large truck. H2s also were connected to a 4-speed automatic, same as many GM vehicles.

H2 was discontinued after around 2007, and H3 was launched.

H3 engines included 2006 Hummer H3: 3.5-liter inline 5-cylinder GM modular engine. Bumped to 3.7 liters for 2007. 225 horsepower for 2006, bumped to 242 for 2007 until discontinuation in 2010. Alpha V-8s: 5.3-liter GM Vortec pushrod 16-valve V-8. 300 horsepower, 320 pound feet. Also a major engine from the Chevrolet Silverado and GMC Sierra light duty trucks, in addition to the Chevrolet Tahoe./GMC Yukon engines.

The Hummer brand really has developed into a legacy, and will likely never be forgotten. The truck brand’s state of being forgotten is not likely to occur because of its unforgettable, tough-guy image.

The luxury car that will help launch Cadillac it's own life: CTS

Three letters that mean it all for Cadillac

By Zachary Filtz for "The Blog of that Filtz Guy"

Sunday, January 25, 2015

Cadillac has for a number of years made some very good decisions (cylinder shutoff) and some very bad decisions (the mediocre, small and plain Catera of the 1990s), and now they have upgraded the recipe for what could be their most important car ever: the midsize almost large luxury rear-and all-wheel-drive CTS sedan.

Subjectively, this is truly Mr. Mojo Risin himself, of course without the rock and roll and drugs: the CTS appears to have the wow-ness factor that Jim Morrison, the ill-fated singer of the 1960s group "The Doors" once possessed. Oh, and I am not the first to compare the Caddy to Morrison: Car and Driver already did.

But that is OK, because this could be the car to help Caddy get off its feet. As of now, Cadillac still is owned and operated by the General Motors corporation, and has been since the early 1900s. My point is, Cadillac has expressed interest in becoming much more independent of its mommy and daddy--that is, some rumors have suggested that it will become its own entity. Thus could mean no more big-cruiser XTS, as that it is based off an already existing GM car. 

Loaded with tech that I do not even fully understand yet, it has very low gears in the upper realm of the first-for-Cadillac 8-speed automatic. A 3.6-liter V-6 appears to remain optional, while the new turbo 4-cylinder is standard. 

If Cadillac has engineered this car to be as good as other critics who have actually driven the car to be, then Caddy will have no problem running its own field, and hopefully, more luxury cars that are as handsome as this is.

--30--

What Batman would drive: the forthcoming, one of a kind...

What Batman would drive

Friday, December, 19, 2014

            I think I have found the car that Batman would drive. It is the twin turbo, full-hybrid all-new Honda NSX, or what will probably be sold as Acura NSX here. It has enough gadgets and possibly enough thrust and acceleration. If you think about it, you can just hear him saying it: “Alfred, fetch me the NSX. I’ll need the power and fuel economy it has.”

            Talk about fuel economy: it appears to offer up to 30 miles per gallon, possibly even more. A lot of the car’s vitals are quiet and mum at the moment, as Honda has only said they will build it, and a few notes about its engine.

            The last NSX was sold here and in other markets and basically launched the Acura brand in America. Although it never caught on with developing a sports car reputation, as bigger pedigrees such as Ferrari still holds to that. The NSX was sold here from 1990 until the mid-2000s, and did as much with a small V-6 and a manual that Dodge Vipers and the like couldn’t match of the 1990s.

            Will the hybrid, and most likely very expensive, all-new NSX make it here, or fall flat on its face in the tough market of record-setting Porsches and champs like new McLaren car? Only time will tell, and who knows? Maybe the new Batman movie set for 2016 will feature Bruce Wayne in a sleek new Acura NSX. 

A Honda Avalon? Honda hasn't thought it, but I have...

Honda could make more money selling an Avalon

By Zachary Filtz

Thursday, December 11, 2014

            Since 1996, Toyota has been selling a somewhat-low-volume car known as the Avalon. Sitting between the Lexus brand of cars and above the Camry midsize car, the Avalon has been an underrated statement of comfort at a reasonable cost. Think of it as a luxury car, but without the insurance premium, and with no prestige emblem.

            Toyota has been selling this large car since then, and last year they redesigned it to appeal to a new breed of customers—aging baby boomers.  

            Honda, meanwhile, has offered the Civic and midsize Accord since the 1970s. In 2010, the Accord Crosstour was the first Accord to grow into the full-size segment, but only because of its extended room from its hatchback. Honda has offered no such competitor to the big Avalon, but surprisingly—there are no plans to sell a big Honda here, or anywhere in North America.

            I question this practice. What is Honda giving up to not sell as many vehicle models as Toyota does? Some of this may be my opinion and only my opinion, but my question is this. Honda could make nearly a half million more dollars per year if they could steal some of the Avalon’s customers, and maybe even more. That is before developing costs and the salaries for the more car people they would have to hire.

            I think of it this way. Honda could stretch out the Accord sedan. Not the coupe, but I am talking about just the sedan. Keep the Honda formula intact, with high reliability, efficient engines, favored by Consumer Reports®, and up-to-date technology.

            In fact, Honda already slowly sells this idea in America as an Acura. It is the large RLX sedan. Sort of like an answer to the middle-luxury Mercedes E-class or a BMW 5, it was launched last year for the Acura brand.

            My idea is this: spruce up the marketing campaign for the car, give it a bit of an edge in terms of design and ditch the heavily carryover Accord interface-system thing, as the blue glow is obviously from a fully-loaded Accord. Change the look of the car. It still essentially appeals to people in their 50s and 60s—bring this down into the 40s or so. Honda could even offer a more creative engine setup, such as turbo engines, like all the rest of the competition now offers.

            The problem I am trying to get is the RLX does not offer a large amount of comfort or driving personality. It is basically a big, roomier Accord sold as a different car. If Honda could consider this selling presentation in a different fashion, they could develop a car to sit between the Accord and the Honda-owned Acura brand. But they choose not to do this, and before costs, they lose around $600,000 per year at the very least for not offering such a car.

            So, my message to Honda is: stop fussing about the Acura brand, and perhaps get the marketing folks to come up with something better—such as “only the best,” or something that implies it is a special car. Otherwise, Avalons will continue to sell, and Acura will continue to be a treat for used car dealers in semi-ritzy neighborhoods, because that is essentially what they are now.

---30---

The silliest car ever made

Jeep SRT Blog: The most pointless vehicle?

By Zachary Filtz

Saturday, November 29, 2014

Have you ever wondered what the most pointless car is on the market not right now on U.S. soil? No, Mercedes-Benz, does not build it. It is not the CLS-class AMG, nor is it the station wagon-like Benz E63 AMG Wagon. The Wagon can get honorable mention. Chrysler-Fiat Corporation currently makes it. What is it? It is the hot rod-like Jeep Grand Cherokee SRT.

The Grand Cherokee has long offered available additional power, but only since the previous gen did it start offering the famous “Hemi” moniker, and only since 2012 has it offered this large, heavy 6.4-liter good-old iron block monster. Let’s crunch the numbers. The SRT G-Cherokee serves up an impressive 470 horsepower (tying the Chrysler 300 SRT and about tying the also-large Dodge Charger SRT), 465 pound-feet of torque, and is about good for a 0-60 rush of just under 5.0 seconds, at least with the outgoing, if dated, 5-speed automatic transmission, which dates to the era when dinosaurs roamed the earth.

            Why is this unnecessary, may the reader ask? How many SUVs can you think of that that have almost more power and torque than a V-8 Camaro? It gets worse. There is not much practicality, as the 4WD system is really tuned to operate like an all-wheel-drive system, making it less friendly through the mud like the regular GC is, and more suited to a drag strip, or airport runway. In other words, an SUV that does not do what SUVs are known for. With the Jeep name, one thinks of a car that does what the billy-goat does, climb mountains, run through the mud and descend steep hills. Not so with the SRT GC. It is tuned to turn like a car, with its big wheels and tires, but it does like to steer well. How well can a 5300-pound sport utility turn?

            I create this idea that it is pointless with this. If you want an SUV with power, then there are other options. BMW sells a few V-8 options with its X5 sport utility, I believe Mercedes still offers a V-8 with the ML-class, and Audi only offers smaller engines for its sport utilities. So, if a customer wants power, why not consider those, or something like a Charger sedan? Perhaps with the Hemi, or the Challenger in some off-the-wall color, or something similar. Is there really a market for Grand Cherokee SRT to continue?

            It also is not very new. It has been sold on our shores for the last eight years, skipping a year before it got redesigned, and then started to be available again. It started off as a mid-size GC with what appeared to be a cheap body kit, huge, shiny-looking wheels, and still a tuned V-8 that would top 140. It was as fast a Ford Mustang in a straight line. But not like Mustang buyers would care. What has changed since then? Nothing, it is the same formula, save for the $70,000 sticker price. A person could buy two Camaros for that price, and probably have more fun than something like this.

            With Chrysler’s recent mistake by trying to make the SRT name its own brand, as well as refusing to offer individual SRT dealer, the brand will now fold back under the Dodge group. This was to include the Charger and Challenger cars. This means that Grand Cherokee SRT was to be sold at Jeep dealers again rather than Chrysler-Dodge-SRT dealers, and what appears to be the end of the 300 SRT sedan, which was the first of the still-in-production Chrysler cars to be available with the SRT tuning treatment. In other words, the fate of the Grand Cherokee SRT is uncertain. If you are looking to buy a heavy SUV that goes fast in a straight line and a high sticker price, then the Jeep SRT just might be your ride.

---30---

BMW is blowing hot air. Literally...

BMW has blown it. And not just in terms of turbos, but in terms of their cars. Subjectively, they are now the worst luxury brand to make a sports car--or a sporty car, if we’re going to be precise. The have performed an atrocity, a casualty, they have even killed off something. What have they done? Read on.

Starting in the 1980s, they started making a very good, if perfect sports car. They called it the M3-the M performance brand of the 3 Series car. Journalists loved it for many reasons. For much of its life, it had an inline six that made V8 power, and by the time they made a V8 for the car, it was also well controlled, for the most part smooth, and very much beyond a sports car, perhaps even a GT3 race car. That is quite a statement for a $50,000 version of what is basically an overall performance package on a 3 Series coupe, but there is more.

It had a sweet engine note, it steered oh so well, especially the early cars.  The icing on the cake came with the non-turbo (take note on that) 333 horsepower 2002-06 car, sans the goofy automatic transmission and unknown reliability, was balanced motoring for going to the store, a short trip, or even a lap around the circuit on the weekend--it could do it all, and never, ever with any turbo or supercharging. Every drive was a thrill, a quick let-off of the clutch, and class-leading tire grip, too. No pumps, no blowers, just a well-engineered engine and motoring car. Got it?

Fast forward to the efficiency-obsessed engineering department of today’s car world, its always on the lips of the sales people, marketing guys, etc. Now, BMW bailed on a long-rumored 3-turbo engine set up, that is a creative engine with not 1 or 2 but rather 3 turbochargers all pumping in air to the idea for the next M3’s motor. Now, it is here, and not only has the car’s price skyrocketed to more than $80,000 loaded, but they settled for a claimed “brand new” engine, a return to the inline six formula again, but with twin (2) turbos. Power has barely risen over the old car’s 414, and here is the bad part: it has been reviewed with bad steering. Remember, it was faultless before, and now it just sucks, apparently. “Vague steering, not much feel. Never really sure what its going to do under full throttle,” to paraphrase what Car and Driver said about it this summer. They have also overpowered it, because the turbos are actually too much for the poor car’s rear tires, and probably for many its prospective customers as well.

For years, the M division made well rounded cars, not ones with overboosted steering, and turbos, too--no different than any other BMW car or sport utility. The M3 always sounded unique in comparison to a regular 3. It it drove by, especially the aforementioned early 2000s car or the outgoing V8-powered car, sort of let out a shriek as it drove by. Like an automotive banshee, if you will. It was unique, not quite a Ferrari but obviously more than a Ford Focus. Now, we are left with poor steering, too much thrust, and an airy sounding, anonymous turbo exhaust sound. Doesn’t sound much different than the anonymous kid-rocket tuner car in the other lane at a stoplight.

They have killed off the old car’s normal engine (“turbo” is a cuss word to most old M3 owners), good steering, snap-crackle-pop exhaust sound, and a sense of organic sports car. Now, BMW buyers will have to weight if the M3’s many cons outweigh its pros, as it’s sales will have to do the talking.

When a Challenger isn't just a Challenger, its a....Viper?

Dodge let the cat out of the bag recently with the new Challenger, specifically its Hellcat variant. I thought I would write about it, since it, like the Expendables movies, has more American fun than you can throw a pie throwing contest to.

Beating the outgoing Shelby Mustang’s prancing 662 hp, the Hellcat crosses the 700-mark. Yes, 707 horsepower factory rated, and an equally unstoppable 650 pound feet of torque. When a regular Hemi isn’t enough...shake it up and add pressure, and boy, is this car ever pressurized like a slow cooker. Most notably is the car’s quarter mile times, which are pretty much on par with Ferraris and even beats a few Lamborghinis, all for $60k, gas guzzler tax included.

But, how does all this compare to the other hot sports car of the 1990s and 2000s, before CAFE laws existed? I’m talking about Fiat Chrysler’s other car, the Dodge SRT Viper. That was one of the most powerful cars in world, especially with no blower, a stick shift and 640 horsepower; enough for a race course. But my question is: Has Dodge’s SRT brand built something so hardcore, that it almost replaces the Viper, but with a retro name tag and looks? The answer to that is yes. Although its reportedly quiet on the inside, Dodge has crammed style, enough horsepower, unlimited top speed, and an exhaust that will probably break your sister’s favorite flower vase--all in one car, with the Viper’s manual gearbox, or an all new automatic. Yes, pretty much the only difference is no V10 here, at least not yet, and an automatic. Automobile magazine has already reported the Hellcat has a top speed of 199 mph, which, if true, will make it the fastest American car not to be a Corvette, Cadillac, or a Hennessy special.
The accolades go on, but my question remains: Has Dodge built something that will kill the Viper, its own long lasting icon?