Wrangler vs H3. Saw it mentioned that it was on the newstands. They've got it online now. Searched and didn't see a previous post. Cut and paste.

caranddriver.com/reviews/comparison_test/crossovers_and_suvs/2008_hummer_h3_alpha_vs_2008_jeep_wrangler_unlimit ed_comparison_test

 

Man......what did anyone learn from reading that, except maybe some history?

Car and Driver..............sheesh.

 

Maybe but it did say Wrangler first place Hummer 2nd

 

Well i'm glad i didn't pay for that story...

 

As much as I love Car and Driver, that was a really stupid comparo. I thought this was a cool picture though...

 

Maybe we should call it Drive and Carer. Their History is even backwards, it is the Inyo Indians and the Panamint Mountains...

 

Did not see the article, however I had the oppurtunity to ride in an H3 and did a bit of softcore wheelin' In addition I also had the opportunity to drive an H2 for a week in the sunny state of Calif, but could not do any hard whellin, so only a bit of softcore. Now back to the H3.
Let me say the H3 was nice on the highway, however it felt cramped and there were a few blind spots due to the small windows. It was pretty nice on the softcore trails we did however I like the wifes 06JK X much better. If I would have liked the H3 better I would have said so.
Now here are some specs so you decide.
H3 cost for the one I rode in. $34,978.00
3.7L 220 HP did not know the torque. It was spec'd to do 0-60 in 10.9 sec, however it was more like 14 seconds to me. Had an auto diff locking system, and it seemed to work pretty good.
The length was 188.1", wheebase at 85.6", and width was 85.6". 33" tires with a 9.1" ground clearance. weight was 4700lbs. An approach angle of 39" and breakover of 25" . Had a side sloap of 40%. I can kinda figgure what that means and it seems pretty good, however we never got that far on the trails we were on. Now I know what our JK can do on the highway, and I will say the H3 drove a bit better and was more quiet. Our JK is a soft top. I would have to say even though we have not taken the JK on any trails yet, as it's the wifes DD, I have driven my 94XJ offroad on some nice trails, and I believe the H3 could keep up with me even though my XJ is at 6"'s and has lockers front and rear. It is a 94 and has alot more miles on it. As for the wifes JK, I can only say she has done as good if not better in the snow we've had here in Pa. Where I kinda power my way through, her JK seems to just tiptoes through. Again hers is not a Rubi, and the price difference is about $9K.
Now after driving the JK, and riding in the H3, let's take a look at a more realistic comparison, as far as price goes.
A Rubi at a base of $32K out the door most likely $34K.
202HP with weight of 4442lbs.
The length of the JK is 184.4", and wheelbase at 116", with a width of 82.8", slightly under the H3. The tires on the Rubi as you know are 32" with a ground clearance of 10.1". The approach angle of the JK is 44.4", over 5" more than the H3. The breakover, however, on the JK is about 4" less at 20.8.
Put these spec's all together and I feel the H3 is a good vehicle, but when compaired to the JK Rubi comes up short for the $$$$$.
As far as highway driving I do believe the H3 is slightly better, however offroad, the JK is way ahead. Now add to that my last question to my friend who was nice enough to take me around in his H3.
How do you take the top off this thing??

 

I couldn't even get through half of that article. It left me wondering if the writer even drove either vehicle. Most of it was just a bunch of "fluffy" crap that had no real meaning whatsoever. I want my 5 minutes back.

 

Cut out all the crap and its probaly only one paragraph of testing. Most of which is the specs you can find on the dealer sites. So that leaves you with half a paragraph for the test drive. What a pile of crap that article was.

 

Have this issue, not a very in-depth piece, but I am for seeing the JK in any of the non 4x4 publications.