By on January 30, 2020

General Motors, like every other automaker, is busy working on its electric future. The most exciting EV model yet to emerge from The General will fall under the GMC nameplate. It’ll be a pickup. And it’ll be badged as a Hummer. A 1,000 horsepower Hummer.

The automaker plans to tease the GMC Hummer EV during this year’s Super Bowl with a series of commercials touting the truck’s performance. Each of the commercials is silent, highlighting the fact that the new truck won’t make the traditional noises a performance vehicle does.

In addition to the model’s 1,000 horsepower, GMC claims the Hummer EV will make 11,500 lb-ft of torque. That should be good for a 0-60 mph time of around 3 seconds.

For comparison, the triple-motor Tesla Cybertruck should offer similar numbers when it goes on sale. GMC isn’t providing range estimates, charging times, or word on how much the darn thing is going to cost. We’ll know more as we get closer to the official reveal, slated for May 20th, and the eventual on-sale date. But GM is getting into the full-EV truck game in a big way.

“GMC builds premium and capable trucks and SUVs and the GMC Hummer EV takes this to new heights,” said Duncan Aldred, vice president of Global Buick and GMC.

In a lot of ways, it makes sense to bring what’ll likely be an expensive EV truck to GMC. Most of GMC’s sales are drawn from higher-trim models, such as the new AT4 and ubiquitous Denali sub-brands. It’ll be an easier sell. It also makes a lot of sense to resurrect the Hummer name in a time where large SUVs and pickup trucks are in high demand, even as governments are looking to reduce emissions and improve fuel economy.

It’s going to be an interesting year in this segment, that’s for sure.

[Image: General Motors]

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

Recommended

75 Comments on “GM Resurrects Hummer As an Electric GMC Pickup With Huge Power Figures...”


  • avatar
    Pig_Iron

    Tough call, Electric Hummer versus Altoid Hummer.

    • 0 avatar
      White Shadow

      If GM does a good job, this new electric Hummer will sell like hotcakes. Nobody cares about BOF platforms, especially in EVs where they don’t make any sense. Bringing back the Hummer name for a new EV is genius.

  • avatar
    jack4x

    Can we please call them out for reporting torque at the wheels?

    With such an obviously cheap trick to deceive consumers, I can’t believe this reveal wasn’t from Tesla.

    • 0 avatar
      MrIcky

      Not being a smart ass here- where is it written that the torque figure is at the wheels? Is that just an assumption because it’s so high or is my reading comprehension going downhill.

      • 0 avatar
        jack4x

        It isn’t stated, but that’s my point, the confusion about the rating will fool those who just see the number without its context. TTAC of all places should be calling this out.

        A Cat 797F mining truck makes 12,000 lb-ft of torque at the crank of its 106 liter quad turbodiesel V20.

        By comparison, a 2020 F350 diesel makes 1050 lb-ft at the crank, has a 4.17:1 1st gear, and a 3.55:1 rear end, equating to 17,200 lb-ft at the wheels before driveline losses. That is infinitely more likely to be in line with what’s being reported here.

  • avatar
    thalter

    Good news, Taycan. You are no longer the least efficient EV!

  • avatar
    ToolGuy

    That’s over 15 million Newton-millimeters. I approve.

  • avatar
    kcflyer

    holy smokes, I can’t wrap my mind around that much torque in a passenger vehicle. Freight train maybe. This should be interesting.

    • 0 avatar
      Scoutdude

      Meanwhile the 2020 F-250 with the diesel is near twice that amount, when properly equipped.

      • 0 avatar
        kcflyer

        Sorry, I don’t follow, The ford is advertising 1050 lb of torque. this story says the Hummer Electric has 10 times as much. As others have opined maybe it’s as simple as two different standards of measuring torque (one at the crank and one at the hubs)

    • 0 avatar
      Sigivald

      See comments above and below.

      They’re not measuring torque the standard way and it’s not actually that high.

      (I’m sure it’ll have an impressive torque curve, and plenty. Just not that much.)

      • 0 avatar
        Vulpine

        @Sigivald: I don’t know if you knew this but electric motors provide maximum torque at zero (0) RPM under maximum current (in other words, full ‘throttle’ at a dead stop.) Such torque numbers as described are possible, depending on type of motors, number of motors, placement of motors and how they are connected to the wheels/axles.

        As such, the torque curve for a battery-electric vehicle starts at its highest and falls as a factor of speed vs resistance. The shape of a pickup truck means the miles per kWh will likely be in the 2-3 range, making a 100kWh battery able to only offer 200-300 miles of range and probably on the lower end of that range in highway ratings. But the thing will pull like a bloomin’ mule (figuratively) and run away with a heavy load compared to gas and diesel trucks. We’ve already seen how this works with a Tesla Model X towing a 5000# trailer (and also what it does to range as a result.)

      • 0 avatar
        APaGttH

        Ummmm…there is no torque curve on an electric motor. It is a nice straight line.

  • avatar
    Vulpine

    I can see FCA/Jeep suing GM as the “grille” carries seven vertical ‘bars’ very reminiscent of Jeep’s own seven-slot grilles.

    Or at least, making the attempt.

    • 0 avatar
      Kyree S. Williams

      Perhaps, but I doubt it. The old Hummer grilles had seven actual openings, just like the Jeep grille, and were a far closer resemblance. If Chrysler (or whatever they called themselves at the time) didn’t try to sue GM way back then, I doubt a suit now would stand up in court.

      • 0 avatar
        dukeisduke

        True.

      • 0 avatar
        SlowMyke

        Both Chrysler (Daimler Chrysler at the time) and GM sued each other over the Hummer grills. GM won due to the shared heritage of the Humvee and Wrangler. I’m not sure there’s any reason for either to go down that path again, now that they’re is precedent.

      • 0 avatar
        Vulpine

        @Kyree: I may be wrong but I believe Daimler-Chrysler did attempt a suit and either lost or settled. However, when you look at how FCA/Jeep has been pushing the suit against Mahindra’s Roxor, I wouldn’t be surprised to see them try again.

      • 0 avatar
        ToolGuy

        They did sue:
        https://www.autonews.com/article/20021125/ANA/211250721/gm-wins-another-round-in-the-hummer-jeep-grille-battle

        (First thing I did when I saw that picture was count the ‘openings.’)

    • 0 avatar
      la834

      They already did, and lost the case. Vertical-bar grilles were ruled too generic, plus Hummer and its grille were conceived when its manufacturer AM General was owned by American Motors (AMC) during the same time they owned Jeep, and their intermingled history meant they were essentially ripping off their own design when the Hummer was designed, not another company’s.

    • 0 avatar
      Hummer

      Jeep already did sue GM for the Hummer Grille, it was ruled since both Hummer and Jeep originate from the same company… several bankruptcies and mergers later, that they can use the 7 slot grille.

    • 0 avatar
      ttacgreg

      No need for a grille on a BEV, so maybe a moot point.

  • avatar
    PeriSoft

    “GMC claims the Hummer EV will make 11,500 lb-ft of torque”

    For the love of God, don’t tell me these guys are following Musk into the misleading pit of “we’ll tell them torque at the wheels instead of torque at the driveline because it sounds way more impressive” BS. My old *Saab* had 6,500ft lbs by that definition.

    • 0 avatar
      Kyree S. Williams

      It looks like that’s exactly what they did. Feh.

      • 0 avatar
        PrincipalDan

        The kid who drives around town here in a Esclade EXT (truck) and a giant “TORQUENADO” sticker across the back window may have finally found a replacement vehicle.

    • 0 avatar
      Vulpine

      @PeriSoft: Considering the type of driveline Tesla, in particular, uses, wouldn’t torque at the wheels BE the driveline torque? It may be that the new Hummer trucks will have a motor (or two) at each axle, which would make such torque numbers accurate.

      • 0 avatar
        jack4x

        @Vulpine, unless you think the wheels of this vehicle are spinning at 11,000 RPM (1,150 MPH on a 35″ tire), then there has to be a gear reduction and therefore a torque multiplication somewhere.

        • 0 avatar
          Vulpine

          @jack4x: Tesla uses a single reduction gear on each driven axle on their vehicles. I make no statement about motor RPM as I simply don’t recall the number at this time but I do believe it turns a a much higher rate than 11,000revs. The wheels turn at whatever rate gives them 120-150mph on a 22″wheel and ‘rubber band’ tires (about 24″ to 26″ OD.) So yes, there is a multiplication somewhere. That’s hardly the point, however, as a modern, BEV can bring almost any load to speed much quicker than an ICE trying to pull the same load. Railroads have been using electric drives for nearly a century already.
          If not longer.

          • 0 avatar
            jack4x

            I didn’t say anything about bringing any load to any speed (which is a measure of power anyways, not torque). EVs have their advantages and disadvantages just like any other class of vehicles.

            You stated that torque at the wheels was the same as motor torque, which is not accurate for a Tesla or any other vehicle, and speculated that 11,500 lb-ft might be accurate for the Hummer’s motor torque which is self evidently ridiculous after spending 3 seconds with the numbers.

          • 0 avatar
            Vulpine

            @Jack4x: Torque, combined with horsepower, is what gets the load moving. Railroad locomotives use 4000hp Diesel engines to power a generator; that generator powers a number of electric motors, usually one per axle but sometimes as few as one axle per truck (wheelset or bogey, depending on who you talk to.) Those motors go through a reduction gear on each powered axle and it is torque that gets those 10,000-ton trains moving. Ford, themselves, demonstrated this with their little railroad stunt… while to be honest the stunt was even easier with the rail cars loaded than when they were empty. (Yes, counter-intuitive but true. Look it up.)

            When a truck pulls a load up a grade, the vehicle slows to a point where the output torque is sufficient to maintain a steady speed–even when the engine is capable of 600 horses and more. Moreover, those trucks have to downshift multiple gears to find a ratio where that torque effectively equals the load to maintain that steady speed. Electric motors don’t need multiple gears to find that “sweet spot” between torque output and drag due to gravity and rolling resistance (including aerodynamic.)

            So no, you didn’t say anything about it and I believe that’s because you don’t understand what’s happening when you bring that load to speed. By itself, horsepower alone is useless without torque. Looking at the internal combustion engine over the decades, I would point out that Fiat once built a 28.4 litre engine in a car called The Beast of Turin. For its size, it only offered about 300hp. An engine that size today would offer not only far more horsepower but also far more torque than just enough to push a vehicle the equivalent weight and size of a modern sedan to 280mph. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=As_63QMoCig

          • 0 avatar
            CRConrad

            Vulpine: “Torque, combined with horsepower, is what gets the load moving.”

            Torque, COMBINED WITH RPM, is what gets the load moving. “Horsepower” (or kilowatt) already *consists partly of* torque, so including it again together with torque is counting torque twice.

            In the light of this mix-up, I think your accusing Jack4x of “not understanding” this stuff feels… Shady, at the very best.

      • 0 avatar
        PeriSoft

        @Vulpine I don’t think final drives are much different in EVs than ICE/Hybrids due to the torque availability of electric motors. I build equipment using servo systems for a living, and electric motors aren’t magic, and don’t have drastically different torque per packaging area / weight than ICE (certainly not orders of magnitude).

        Further, even if that *was* the case, stating torque in such a way would be deliberately misleading, because when consumers see “1000ft lb” they’re gonna think, “Big honkin’ F250” or “Bugatti Veyron” and when they see “10,000ft lb” they’re gonna think “10x as powerful as a Veyron!”. The point of that number is comparison, and using a deliberately misleading comparison is really, really slimy.

        • 0 avatar
          Vulpine

          @PeriSoft: Clearly you are unfamiliar with how a BEV works as compared to a hybrid. A hybrid is still dependent on the engine to build the horsepower while the electric motors are quite small compared to a BEV. For the BEV, all the electricity is stored in the battery pack and is released at the press of the throttle–the only limiter being the circuits controlling how MUCH current goes to the motors.

          I strongly recommend test driving a Tesla–any Tesla–and comparing the acceleration to any hybrid of your choice. I also recommend taking a look at the Hybrid’s battery voltage and energy capacity compared to a Tesla’s (or Porsche’s, for that matter.) The differences are quite significant in output power.

          • 0 avatar
            PeriSoft

            I just included hybrids in there for completeness’ sake. Either way, final drive ratios for all types are roughly comparable, and stating axle torque is totally meaningless: Put enough reduction on a Prius and it’ll have 11,000ft lbs at the axle too!

            Basically, if this becomes the new standard, reported torque figures will be useless to understand power train performance, and everybody will be incentivized to massage their ratios to make ever-larger axle torque numbers, even beyond the point of uselessness.

            It’s seriously stupid. All because one dude wanted to spin crap to gin up the hype machine.

          • 0 avatar
            Vulpine

            My point, PeriSoft, is that the drivetrains are completely different for some BEVs as compared to others. Tesla and Rivian are using electric motors to directly drive the axles through nothing more than a reduction gear while others are essentially using a single motor to drive two or four wheels through a more conventional, if single-speed, transmission layout and differentials. Yet others are using two or four “in-wheel” motors which are significantly smaller but whose combined output is probably less than 200 hp (and currently operating at much lower supply voltage.)

            The simple point is that you cannot assume all drivetrains are equal, especially now that electric motors are replacing the old mechanical drivetrains.

          • 0 avatar
            CRConrad

            WTF do these things have to do with each other: “A hybrid is still dependent on the engine to build the horsepower while the electric motors are quite small compared to a BEV.” ?!?

            The opposite of being dependent on something is not being dependent on it; the opposite of being small is being big. You’re contrasting velocity to walnuts. Please try to accept the possibility that you aren’t as well-informed on this stuff as you have hitherto thought.

  • avatar
    dukeisduke

    Is there a point to this thing? It doesn’t sound like it.

    Also, why are all comments going to moderation now?

    • 0 avatar
      JMII

      Electric Bro-Dozer seems to be the point, which is about the strangest concept ever.

      Since the Bro-Dozer crowd loves rolling coal I don’t see them being interested in some battery powered truck no matter how big the HP/TQ numbers are. The regular Tesla models have already proven this. Hellcat owners might lose at the drag strip to a Model S but they ain’t looking to buy one.

      The only logic I see here is: big trucks sell for big money and EVs are expensive. So if your trying to sell an EV by making it a truck the consume is more accepting of the high price tag. Everyone who has tried to sell small electric cars has found it to be tough since small = cheap to consumer. Telsa figured out the way to sell expensive EVs was to make them a luxury product to justify the cost.

      • 0 avatar

        I think that’s the concept high end electric cars sell better and can have decent margin. And GM’s best high end vehicles are trucks and large SUVs do I think it makes sense. brodozer is only part of the buying pool. Lots of large trucks sitting next horse barns with a Tesla in the driveway of the house out front here in Connecticut.

      • 0 avatar
        ttacgreg

        This thing would need some sort of attention getting gimmick to appeal to the bro-dozers. Perhaps an external sound system broadcasting 100dB whatever, Harley Davidson sounds, or diesel locomotive sounds, or perhaps a menu of obnoxious intimidating sounds to pick from. Maybe some sort of legalistically acceptable blinding LED light displays would help.

  • avatar
    ajla

    Even with EVs I’m not really into the “eternal silence” messaging, but I know some people on TTAC love it.

  • avatar
    Hummer

    Too narrow and I don’t actually see a single shred of HUMMER DNA in that front. But then again it’s a GMC, not a Hummer.

    I am still 100% convinced this will be a unibody minivan, or use the same sh111y suspension design from the new Suburban. Either way this will fail and is the exact reason why I never wanted Hummer to be resurrected, because I knew Barra and Co could never carry on this line correctly and worse it would end up like Jeep.

    That’s to make nothing of it being an EV.

    • 0 avatar

      I mean jeeps path over the last decade has more then tripled sales, and resulted in one of the most valuable car brands in the world. So while it might annoy enthusiasts it seems to be a sound business decision.

      I agree Barra has made some questionable decisions (mostly with the current Silverado) but I guess we’ll wait to see.

      For the record I think it’s possible to build IRS that lives up to off-road and towing needs. It’s just up yo gm to do it right.

      • 0 avatar
        Hummer

        “ For the record I think it’s possible to build IRS that lives up to off-road and towing needs. It’s just up yo gm to do it right.”

        The H1 is proof of that, but how likely is it for GM to put geared hubs on this? If Jeep hasn’t even attempted to make a competent Independent suspension design despite having the off-road brand what makes you think GM will storm in and do this right?

        Jeep has taken the BMW approach to sales and succeeded, it’s not a long term recipe for success. Long term it’a bound to do more harm than good, short term profits are the key to healthy bonuses on the other hand.

      • 0 avatar
        ttacgreg

        I read that the original military Hummer has IRS. It allows elevation of the rear differential up and out of harm’s way.

        • 0 avatar
          Hummer

          Greg, very different system the H1 Independent suspension vs conventional independent suspension, the drive going into each of the H1s hubs isn’t centered in the hub which allows them to drop the angle of the control arms significantly over traditional independent suspension.

    • 0 avatar
      White Shadow

      Nobody will care if it’s unibody. And besides, why would anyone put an electric drivetrain on a BOF platform? They wouldn’t because it doesn’t make sense. Using the Hummer name on a powerful electric line of vehicles is genius. If the vehicles are any good, they will sell like hotcakes. Hell, maybe I’ll buy one.

      • 0 avatar
        Hummer

        Everyone that off-road will, unibody has proven to be a non starter for even light off-road use.

        • 0 avatar
          White Shadow

          Less than 1% of new truck/SUV buyers ever venture off the pavement. Nobody cares….

          • 0 avatar
            Hummer

            “ Less than 1% of new truck/SUV buyers ever venture off the pavement. Nobody cares….”

            Care to share where this statistic comes from?

            Hummer brand had a very high off roading percentage among new buyers, if they intend to capture any of that market then this better be able to at least keep up. A unibody cannot keep up. No one cares about a grouchy opinion on off-roading from someone that has clearly never left state maintained road.

          • 0 avatar
            White Shadow

            “Care to share where this statistic comes from?

            Hummer brand had a very high off roading percentage among new buyers, if they intend to capture any of that market then this better be able to at least keep up. A unibody cannot keep up. No one cares about a grouchy opinion on off-roading from someone that has clearly never left state maintained road.”

            It’s common knowledge. If you want to off-road, buy a Wrangler. But even among Wrangler owners, a super low percentage of them off-road. How do you not know this?

            As for Hummer, they’ve been dead for ages now. Bringing back the name is a marketing ploy. They aren’t intending to build an electric offroader. Why? Well, simple—nobody wants one. The old Hummers (H2 & H3) weren’t very good off-road anyway. You really needed an H1, but it was too big to do well on anything but widely open trails.

  • avatar
    cprescott

    Wonder if Muskrat over at Tesla will put his stainless steel electric Delorean Pickup against this. Hopefully the fake Hummer will pull the frame off the Muskrat motors fake pickup.

  • avatar
    redapple

    Resurrecting Hummer is a smart move. Great Brand. And as an EV…….

    Might be brilliant.

  • avatar
    Oberkanone

    How much?

    $49,995

  • avatar
    phxmotor

    The Muskrat pickup isn’t a fake pickup.
    It’s merely a rediculous pickup.

  • avatar
    Rick T.

    Let’s hope the cargo is securely battened down when accelerating.

  • avatar
    Menar Fromarz

    So what it really needs is the “black smoke generator” so all the Bro’s can roll fake coal. Can it get any more ridiculous? Hummer indeed. Obviously GM is bereft of real ideas or innovation.

  • avatar
    thegamper

    The funniest thing is going to be the fight between the coal rolling gashole intentionally blocking the EV charging station and electric truck owners.

    It will be like sweet cannibalistic civil war watching Trump trucks go to war with the wealthier and more progressive greenie truck owners.

  • avatar
    Lou_BC

    If this electric Hummer has a comparable driving range and price to an ICE pickup, I’m not going to care what it has under the hood. It has to meet my needs for what I can afford to pay.

  • avatar
    ttacgreg

    New QTOD topic!
    We could have tongue in cheek speculations over what old storied brand names get stuck on a new EV ?
    eMustang, eHummer . . . . .

  • avatar
    Right_Click_Refresh

    Oh boy how refreshing!
    *throws up in mouth a little bit*

  • avatar
    ToolGuy

    Depending on perspective in the photo, this vehicle promises to have an impressively high beltline/short greenhouse – see the roof marker lights in the picture.

    (Although at 1,150 mph, I suppose you don’t want too much exposed glass on the front of the vehicle.)

  • avatar

    GM has never broken the 20,000 annual sales barrier with the Bolt. It stands to reason the more expensive Hummer will sell at an even slower pace.

    • 0 avatar

      GM also hardly sold any compact cars but they sold hundreds of thousands of pickups that cost multiples of what their compact cars cost. I don’t think the bolt sales is an indicator of other EV sales success. At the current moment you have one EV builder with sales driven by somewhat rabid fandom and being the car for the wealthy (for the moment)as well as first mover advantage. The other players are trying to figure out how to get normal buyers into electric cars still.

  • avatar

    Tens of Thousands of XJ and ZJ offroaders may contend unibody is just fine for 90% of offroading. I had one best offroad vehicle I ever owned. Range rover changes to Unibody a while back and gather they still do well offroad (it’s not the frame that breaks at least).

    • 0 avatar
      White Shadow

      Only the truly uninformed bash unibody for offroading. Jeep and Land Rover are just two brands that have had enormous success building unibody vehicles with amazing capabilities over the long term. But in all honesty, it doesn’t really matter these days because the market is dictated by buyers who have no interest in offroading. It’s an image thing at best. Most people don’t drive in conditions that require the maximum capabilities of their 4wd vehicles.

  • avatar
    Wheatridger

    Great- now there’s a vehicle that promises the smugness of a Prius and the menace of a Panzer tank. It’s doubly dystopian!

    • 0 avatar
      mcs

      “smugness of a Prius”?? I’ve seen smugness from drivers of all types of vehicles. Besides, I think most prius owners are now interested in it’s new role as the cockroach of the highways. You just can’t kill the things. They’re also good for 40+ mpg at 80 mph.

Read all comments

Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • Imagefont: Well I have a scopemeter 190-102 and a power quality analyzer too!
  • Freddie: I have a 2019 Civic Si. I could have afforded a Type R, but just didn’t see the value when my...
  • -Nate: Beat away . I was thinking about this thread again to – day as I got off the i210 freeway and a late...
  • DenverMike: That’s one way of looking at it. From Ford’s perspective, that’s sales of $75,000...
  • quaquaqua: I work for Fluke, so I’m a little proud to see all the love in the comments!

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Who We Are

  • Matthew Guy
  • Timothy Cain
  • Adam Tonge
  • Bozi Tatarevic
  • Chris Tonn
  • Corey Lewis
  • Mark Baruth
  • Ronnie Schreiber