2004 Hummer H2 from North America - Comments

3rd Mar 2007, 13:29

Please do SOME research, at least a little OK?

Jeeps are great off road vehicles, so are Hummers. Jeeps can be modified to do incredible off road chores. Hummers are more like Land Rovers, they are made to go off road without all the modifications.

Some "Jeeps" are like 90% mods, and 10% Jeep. They can go up rock faces, that could amaze you.

Google "Hummer X Club", then forums, then video library, then take your pick, dozens to choose from. Most of these Hummers are stock, or close to stock.

3rd Mar 2007, 13:54

How come you keep spewing "facts" that are never linked, like the "Army says" quote from above, with no link ever, but demand links from others?

Just go to YouTube and put in "Hummer off road" to view many. Hummer X club, Serious 4X4, and plenty of others also offer visual proof of the abilities you say don't exist.

You living in California doesn't surprise me at all.

If someone wants to buy a Hummer for whatever reason they like, they can. They don't owe you any explanation whatsoever. Go drive what you like.

The socialist agenda limits everyone eventually. You might think it's great, until they come for something you enjoy.

3rd Mar 2007, 14:43

If you want an off-roader, get a Land Rover! They are sophisticated machines with style. Where I live, Hummers are now seen as just a fashion accessory with no real use or purpose. Everyone seems to hate the thing, and I am one of them. Land Rovers are the way forward! Tested on Top Gear, the Land Rover did a hell of a lot better on and off road than the Hummer. So get yourself one of those!

3rd Mar 2007, 16:04

Land Rovers are unreliable, expensive to fix and VERY expensive to buy. I don't see many Land/Range Rovers off road either, they're mostly just status symbols. And if by 'they tested it on top gear and the land rover beat the hummer', you mean that stupid 'movie' by Jeremy Clarkson in which he raced an Escalade and a Hummer and a Range Rover up a mountain, and the Land Rover won, it was because the people driving the American cars obviously got them stuck on purpose, and the Land Rover went on the trail while the others didn't. It was biased crap trying to make American cars out to be bad when they're not.

3rd Mar 2007, 16:18

Funny, here it's the $70,000 Land Rover that is seen as the expensive fashion accessory. I've never seen, or heard, of a Land Rover being taken off road since about 1980, although they used to have a great reputation. Nobody drives them except doctor's wives. Not that the H2 or H3 is taken off road that much, either. So in that sense, I agree that the Land Rover would look much nicer going to the grocery store. Seems like I've read a surprising number of complaints and expensive repairs about Land Rovers.

3rd Mar 2007, 21:54

You cannot be serious.

Top Gear? Did you see that episode, did you think that was objective? Oh please, the very fact that you wrote that, shows exactly where your credibility is.

Land Rovers are fine vehicles, here is a video to consider.

http://www.serious4x4.com/videos/D90-H1.wmv

Uninformed responses here appear to be nothing more than anti-Hummer propaganda. It's not about the vehicle, it's about the greenie politics involved.

7th Mar 2007, 05:17

I don't know who came up with the statistics about Hummers being seen off road second only to jeeps, but I'm sure the accountant that did hasn't been any further off road than their patch of grass in their suburb home. You will see many Jeeps off road, and you will be just as likely to see an alien spacecraft off road as you will a Hummer. Besides, these things are too wide to fit anywhere interesting off road. There are these things called TREES that would prevent a Hummer from even getting to half of the places that I go in my Tacoma. That's what you will find off-road; Jeeps, Toyota's, Nissan's, maybe a couple of Rangers. NO Hummers.

The funny part is, they're just as useless ON the road. They don't have a bed, so it's not a truck, you can't haul anything, don't really have enough power to tow anything large, it's not a car, because a car would get good gas mileage and be easy to get around in city traffic. So... what's the point?

If you want to be noticed, string some Christmas lights all over your car, and plug them into the cigarette lighter. Seeing this would give people the same feeling they get when they see someone driving a Hummer.

7th Mar 2007, 18:04

Your bias is so completely obvious. You don't like the vehicle, you feel NOBODY should like the vehicle. You post here with no knowledge of the vehicle besides parroting propaganda. Your comments here are nothing more than protest of the fact the vehicle exists.

You don't bother with facts, you're just throwing around unsupported claims and insults, you ignore input and restate your presupposed claim - circle. Your greenie political agenda is to remove the vehicle from the market so that nobody has the ability to purchase one. You want to remove the choice for others, because you disagree with it.

If your arguments were all true, free enterprise would do that work for you. It looks like this vehicle, in spite of all your claims, is still here.

Why Hummer specifically? Is it just the first in line? If you're successful, who's next? Full size trucks, Expeditions and Suburbans?

7th Mar 2007, 22:33

18:04; Yes, I am biased toward any vehicle like the Hummer. And Expeditions and Suburbans should definitely be phased out as quickly as the Hummer: none of them should ever have been made. You are correct. No one should have one of these three, and if they do buy one, they should be taxed much more heavily than everyone else.

9th Mar 2007, 20:56

Hahahaaaaaa! You're joking right? Seriously, I hope you're kidding.

1) This is AMERICA, therefore, people don't dictate what products are available to consumers; ESPECIALLY not based on your opinion of just not liking that type of vehicle!!

2) Based on that same thinking, I say lets put huge tariffs on your beloved Toyota Prius that's imported from Japan and make it impossible to buy one in America! Why? Because I don't like them! They're ugly and slow and get in my way on the freeway! Therefore, lets outlaw them! Because I said so!! Are you beginning to see the flaw in your thinking?

10th Mar 2007, 03:03

20:56 Clearly, you couldn't have meant to be taken seriously with that logic. How many older Suburbans are out running around out there getting 9 mpg? That's why I don't like them; because they're wasteful, excessive, junk and they are a problem for everyone. The Prius gets something like 55 or 60 mpg; part of the solution to these problems. There is no fault in that logic.

10th Mar 2007, 08:07

People don't dictate what type of car is available to consumers? HMMM, well here in California you can't buy a diesel car for one, so people are dictating that. In AMERICA you can't buy a mass market car without airbags and TONS of other REQUIREMENTS, so that is being dictated.

10th Mar 2007, 13:28

So what's your point? Why do you care what other people wish to drive? I don't think you'll be fitting a family of 5 or 6 into a tiny Prius and expect decent performance. That thing is abmyssal as it is. The Prius DOES NOT GET THE CLAIMED MPG. PROVEN. Look at any automotive magazine, or Edmunds and such, and you will find that the reported real life mpg is 30-45. Big difference. I happen to own an older Suburban, 88 to be exact. Your 9mpg is rather off, because mine gets an average of 16mpg. You're a very stereotypical person. You see a large vehicle and you automatically assume that the people using them are being wasteful and are big meenies. Why do you have to bash other peoples decisions in their vehicles, whether it be personal taste or needs. Your personal taste is a Toyota Prius. So what? No one goes around and bashes your car. And there's one thing you should remember, annoy the wrong person and they just might end up flattening your car into the ground and driving on like nothing happened.