portland independent media center  
images audio video
newswire article united states

bikes/transportation | corporate dominance | media criticism | technology

Newsflash to Owners: Hummer Guzzles Gas

Surprise, surprise, the number 1 complaint about the hummer h2: its excessive fuel consumption. Who would've thought?
Newsflash to Owners: Hummer Guzzles Gas
Tue May 6, 2003 06:15 PM ET
By Michael Ellis

DETROIT (Reuters) - Hummer owners, frustrated with the vehicle's excessive fuel consumption, ranked the SUV last in a benchmark poll of vehicle quality, according to a survey released by J.D. Power and Associates on Tuesday.

In the group's annual survey of consumers during the first 90 days of ownership, General Motors Corp.'s highly profitable Hummer brand had 225 complaints per 100 vehicles. By comparison, the top-ranked Lexus, by Toyota Motor Corp., had 76 complaints per 100 vehicles.

Gary Cowger, president of GM North America, said the H2's fuel consumption was the No. 1 complaint among owners, outpacing the No. 2 gripe -- that the SUV's headlights were aimed too high -- by a 2-1 margin. GM has fixed the headlight problem, Cowger said.

At 6,400 pounds (2,903 kg), the Hummer H2 is so heavy it falls outside U.S. regulations on fuel economy. Unlike other passenger cars and trucks, GM does not have to display the gas mileage on the window sales sticker of the H2 at dealerships. Hummer estimates the military-inspired SUV gets 11 to 13 miles per gallon.

J.D. Power conducted its survey of 52,000 U.S. owners and lessees earlier this year when the price of gas spiked higher.

"There's a very close correlation between the price of gasoline at the pump and the incidence of excessive fuel consumption problems," Brian Walters, director of product research with J.D. Power, told Reuters.

Hummer's thirst for gas certainly has not hurt sales. Hummer is the only GM division that has sold vehicles this year without costly sales incentives, such as the zero percent financing offer that has swept the industry.

homepage: homepage: http://reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=topNews&storyID=2692942

Hummers r 4 Chumps 09.May.2003 15:30

Rotton Dino-sore

"Hummer brand had 225 complaints per 100 vehicles"

That's 2.25 complaints per vehicle! Almost as high as the milage.

Greedy consumers 09.May.2003 15:55


Why not just invent a car that runs on human blood? How can anyone even consider driving a monstrosity like this? Ever time you drive down the highway you would be drving over the cracking bones of a thousand Iraqi and Afghan children.

Driving on bones? 09.May.2003 17:24


Perhaps, but you wouldn't notice because of the unusually fine suspension in a Hummer ... [vbg]



Uhh... 09.May.2003 21:32

Dark Woodsman

"Ever time you drive down the highway you would be drving over the cracking bones of a thousand Iraqi and Afghan children."

Last I heard there wasn't any oil in Afghanistan and that conspiracy theory pipeline hasn't even started. Face it, you poor bottom feeders are just jealous of something you'll never have. The price of a Hummer is probably equal to what you will earn in your lifetime. Doesn't really matter though, eventually the human race will be extinct anyway...

oh come on! 09.May.2003 21:54

smog city

"Face it, you poor bottom feeders are just jealous of something you'll never have. "

Yeah, like clean air, safe and quiet neighborhoods, lighter and efficient vehicles, more bike lanes, more trains and other efficient transportation, sane foreign and domestic energy policy, adherence to the Kyoto protocol, urban planning based on feet and bikes instead of six-lane strips of brakelights and waste!

DWoodsman 10.May.2003 00:22


DW- "Doesn't really matter though, eventually the human race will be extinct anyway... "

DW, but I thought you and your Neandertal Hummer buddies went extinct 35,000 years ago.

question for 'Dark Woodsman'--- 10.May.2003 02:27

mildly curious

'Doesn't really matter though, eventually the human race will be extinct anyway... '

--what role in human existence do *you* fulfil,

or for what 'system of values' or life philosophy-style do you stand,

'Dark Woodsman'


Bush plan 10.May.2003 03:10


I find it interesting the the person people seem to hate on this web site, has set aside 1.5 billion dollars in federal research grants towards the creation of hydrogen automobiles. I also find it interesting how quickly people seem to hate anybody who doesn't want to ride a bike for transportation. The SUV is great for those of us with physical dissabilities that make riding bike to work impossible.

Get a clue... 10.May.2003 07:26

Dark Woodsman

"more trains and other efficient transportation"

Heh heh, I have to laugh at that one. Last time I heard it actually costs $23 everytime you ride MAX but because of government subsidies, both State and Federal you the rider only pay a few dollars. The rest is paid for by the high taxes that all the rich people pay. So basically its a socialist nanny train that could never turn a profit on it own just like Amtrak.

What remarkable dumbnitude 10.May.2003 09:40

Mulberry Sellers

Buying a truck and being pissed when it doesn't behave like a car.

That's like adopting a dog and expecting it to behave like a cat.

That's what happens when people make purchasing decisions based on the images planted in their heads by marketing instead of taking the time to consider their actual needs and the actual characteristics of what's available.

I wonder if these people also expect a truck to drive like a car.

If so, I hope I never encounter them on the road.

hate is a strong word 10.May.2003 12:58


I don't hate anyone, especially not bush (pity would probably be my strongest feeling there) and not SUV owners (that's more frustration I think). Anyway oldblueeyes, if you benefit from having an SUV great, you are in the 0.01% of people in this country who do. The rest are just suckered into buying a status symbol. Now, normally I'd say people can buy whatever the hell they want, it's their money but there are 2 issues with SUV's.

The first is that there's a public safety issue. SUV's are much more prone to accidents than other vehicles, they are much more likely to cause an injury or fatality in an accident, and the rise in their use on the road is correlated with the rise in traffic injuries and fatalities nationally. So it seem spretty likely that the rise in SUV ownership is costing people their lives. If companies wanted to design safer SUV's that would be one thing, but at the rate that they're selling why should they? They're already enjoying charging the most amount of money for the cheapest kind of vehicles to produce. It's a capitalist fantasy come true; who cares if it kills people? They have people convinced that SUV's are safer because of one statistic, the surviveability rate of SUV drivers in impacts with smaller vehicles. But in any other situation, hitting another object, another large vehicle, or the all too commonplace rollover the surviveability is less. Furthermore, the combined surviveability rate is lower, so the SUV driver might be safer in a collision with a small car but the person in the other car has a much higher chance of being killed. And if you look at the rate of accidents SUV's are much more likely to be involved in accidents over other kinds of cars (somewhere I have another post on indymedia with links to all the statistics).

The second issue is that SUV's consume a large amount of fuel. Again, if it were just someone wanting to spend a lot of money on a cheaply produced car, and then further spend a lot of money on maintenance and fuel I wouldn't have a problem. But the fuel consumption is literally going to kill us. Anyone that's interested should read Thom Hartmann's Last Hours of Ancient Sunlight which looks at the myriad of ways our culture is dependent on oil and what it will mean to run out (like how we won't be able to produce enough food to feed people in this country). Plus, of course, you have wars being waged for control of natural resources abroad which is stirring up anti-american sentiment in most other nations on the planet. It will come back to us and what will be our defense? Well, the corporate profits were too good to force companies to make more efficient cars to end our dependence on foreign supplies of oil?

oil pipeline 12.May.2003 11:45

clara fication

Someone posted something above about how the oil pipeline hasn't begun in Afghanistan. The person is apparently a troll, but I think it worth responding in this case anyway. Yes, there is an oil pipeline through Afghanistan, from the caspian region. It was planned and begun in the mid 1990s, through US transnational interests. (Some of those interests are in the whitehouse now.) The project was expected to bring in $trillions, but was stalled in the late 1990s due to an "instable government" in Afghanistan. I've actually been following this story for some time, and you can look up many sources written before the Afghan war started that are clear in paving the way -- several sources come out and state, point blank, that such a war would be in the interests of the oil interests. At that time, though, it appeared to be politically difficult to justify any US war with Afghanistan. What a difference a couple of planes made.

Please do your own research on this. The facts are there, you just need to pull yourself away from your television set and find them.

male endowment issues 05.Jun.2003 17:29


At the risk of lowering the elevation and quality of commentary on this site, there is, i have noticed, one factor which no one here has thus far mentioned as to what possesses people to buy these Status Stilts on wheels....and it should be known that a large portion of Hummer buyers are males with Penis Envy. (Freud wasn't QUITE right...) As a female myself i have thought many times what a good idea it might be if someone pointed it out to them, with a pamphlet of some sort or "sorry about your penis card" in the window wipers, that giant blundering yellow hummer only fuels the napoleon complex even further. This does not apply of course to people with disabilities, but please people, a little respect for the ozone layer?!

Not bothered by bad fuel economy 08.Sep.2003 15:36

My name is, "who?"

I don't own an SUV, but I do own a fullsize Chevy Silverado ext. cab truck with a V8, lifted with oversize dirt tires.
My fuel economy is about 12.7 MPG and guess what? I don't care because I bought the truck intending for a truck. Guess what folks? A V8 takes a lot of juice. If you can't afford the gas, you shouldn't be driving that vehicle anyway. Save yourself some trouble, buy a honda civic and save up your pennies ill you can buy an el camino if you want something closer to the SUV...

another thing 08.Sep.2003 15:42

My name is, "who?"

One more thing, for the idiots that think it makes all that big a difference that they drive a mini van rather than a SUV.
It is making no dent in the Ozone layer that you drive a van or large car to work every day!

It is the nature of the fuel not the size of the engine that is causing our atmosphere to become a magnifying glass.
Until the gov wakes up to this and starts pouring money into the development of alternative fuels and fuel processes, it doesn't matter what you drive, you're still killing all of us, including yourself!

Did you know that a 100% oil ester derived from the oil of a rapeseed plant was used in a 10,000 mi test in a standard diesel engine with no modifications?
The output was 50% less hydrocarbons and 75% less carbon monoxide and wow imagine that, the fuel is renewable, so we don't have to tear up the earth looking for it.
Hmmm, maybe I should go into business for myself...

Hummer Drivers: Buy This Dirty Vehicle & Taken To Cleaners 25.Nov.2004 14:05

Shamed To Admit I Sat In One

After being a passenger in a Hummer road test, I am truly stunned at how completely unremarkable this vehicle is, apart from its size. Except for the narrow field of vision due to an undersized windshield, I felt exactly like I was in a Chevy Tahoe. Actually, I've been told a Hummer H2 IS a Tahoe with a Hummer-eqsue body shell stuck onto it, kind of like one of those Monster "Trucks" that are nothing but fibreglass shells molded to look like trucks. The H2 probably is a Tahoe (or some other GM SUV) in drag.

The H2 has all sorts of decorative body panelling that serves no other purpose but to make it look like a real Hummer instead of a bigger, uglier Honda Element. I felt like I was on a movie set at Universal Studios, riding around in a Tahoe covered in props trying to make it look as macho as possible. The metal gearshift, the plastic thingamajig on the hood, the gas tank lid and the air vents were all designed solely to fluff the driver's member, to make him feel more of a man. It just felt so forced and phoney, about as convincing to me as a Knight Rider re-run. The only missed opprotunity was the laughable fuel economy display. In keeping with the rest of the design, it should be announced on roof mounted loud speakers, accompanied by a trumpet sound and followed by a "and proud of it, you fudge-packing hippie!"

To pay a base price of $70,000 and to spend probably half as much a year in gas, I expect to exit that vehicle feeling like I've been given a "hummer". At the very least, I expected the kind of blast of testosterone that would make me do things I would regret later. Instead, I just got out and yawned. Despite all the posing, this thing felt too soft & comfy, not manly at all. It was like drinking warm milk. Despite all the macho posturing, the vehicle damn near put me to sleep.

I'd much rather slap that kind of coin on a REAL $70,000 car, a 500 series BMW a Mercedes, or a sportier model. Something with guts, something that moves with a lot less dead dinos being burned up. Granted, we didn't go off-road and play to it's supposed stregths. But if I want to drive through fields, I'll use the ol' pickup, not a luxury vehicle designed for suburbanites.

Anybody who buys one of these things is a lame-ass loser trying to compensate for his small package. He is proud of being a wasteful jerk and definately has more money than brains. He certainly doesn't deserve to have $70,000...and if this purchase is any indicator, won't have it for long. A fool and his money are soon parted.

Hummer is not for everyone! 20.Sep.2006 13:09

Informed Debater

The Hummer was not a vehicle made to be on city streets or pick your kids up from school. The Hummer was built as a specialty vehicle for the military. Yes, thats right, THE MILITARY. Not a muscle head who wants people to see how big has wallet is. The Hummer H1 (Civilian Hummvee) was and still is practilly the same as a Hummvee. NO one needs a Hummer. And a Hummer or any type of car for that matter, are not the causes for our depleating ozone layer. Our Earth itself produces more air pollution than Humanity combined. Over 80% of the hazardess greenhouse gases are naturally made. Human activities on this planet create less than 10% of all pollution. The Earth's ozone depleated once before and it came back. Vehicles produce less than .4 % of hazardess gasses, and most of it is carbon dioxe, the weakest green house gas. Every type of engine burns fuel, weather it is a Hummer or a Hybrid. People just want something to point there finger at to make themselves look better. Well the big picture is that we cannot stop our depleting ozone layer. Global warming is not caused by cars either! The temperature is lower now than it was in the 1600's. And there were no cars or factories back then. If you want to talk and blame something, blame earth not Hummer!